On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:46 AM Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 12:09 PM Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > > addr:street= should be tagged anyway, and that's where you can put your > "County Route 34". Attempting to infer this based off the nearest street > should be a last resort because, at least in the US, it's not uncommon for > what the street's actually named and signed to be radically different than > the postal address's street name for simplicity or brevity's sake. > > I do that, too, when I do address points or building footprints. I > don't propose importing my county's address points (because of data > quality issues) or its building footprints (because of licensing > issues) so that happens manually on a catch-as-catch-can basis. If > you're proposing 'addr:street' on the way, that's fraught with another > set of issues - but I don't think that's what you're proposing. > No, no. I'm not proposing addr:street on ways at all, only on things that actually have an address. What I am saying is that noname=yes should be a trigger to validators that they can't depend on the way to handle address validation. Just saying that name=County Road 34, ref=CR 34 is wrong; noname=yes; ref=CR 34 is the way to go.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
