22
'addr:city is redundant' (poptalk.scrubbles.tech)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/openstreetmap@lemmy.ml
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I just ran across a changeset that removed addr:city from a bunch of POIs, on the grounds that it was "redundant with boundary data." Some of these POIs had a Canadian postcode that would indeed imply city, but others had no postcode. The city could of course be calculated by the POI's presence inside the city relation, but I hadn't seen this as a rationale to remove information before.

Would people consider this valid? By extension, should I stop documenting the city when I create a POI; is it considered noise?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 1 year ago

@pootriarch
I generally consider it poor form to remove good data even if it isn't strictly necessary.

The necessity of the addr:city tag depends on the area. In some places it's strictly according to a boundary that exists in OSM. In others the boundary data is either missing or doesn't always align with the "postal town" according to the mail carrier so it's good to include it.

@openstreetmap

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •