IMHO addr:city is the "postal" city at least for countries that have such a concept. With other words validating the tag against admin boundaries is fundamentally flawed to start with and will only work in the cases in which admin entity and postal city just happen to have the same name (in the country I'm resident in there are nearly no post code boundaries that are exactly the same as the administrative boundary with the same name).
Simon Am 30.06.2020 um 13:59 schrieb Florian Lohoff: > Hi, > i am running some address validation pipeline as others do aswell. In > Germany we have the case that most of the time the addr:city > on the addresses matches the name on the admin_level 8 boundary > (Sometimes admin_level 6). > > So normally you have: > > boundary=administrative > admin_level=8 > name=Gütersloh > > And all addresses carry a > > addr:city=Gütersloh > > Now there are some exceptions. One example i always paint red in the > validator is 33428 Marienfeld. > > For Marienfeld there is an admin_level=8 which carries the > name=Harsewinkel which is correct for all "suburbs" or villages > belonging to Harsewinkel except Marienfeld. > > Marienfeld itself carries a admin_level=9 > > So i'd like to have a place in OSM where i store this exceptions > information (There are plenty other places which have this > exception). > > So i would propose to set an "addr:city=Marienfeld" on the admin_level=9 > boundary. So the address validator knows that addresses contained within > this al9 should carry a different addr:city than they normally would > using the al8. > > Other ideas? > > Flo > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
