Closed stev-0 closed 7 years ago
Thanks for adding this issue @stev-0. I've given it some consideration but think it would be best to leave it as is.
Firstly, it seems more common to add the addr:xxx
tags to the amenity=school
way, although adding it to the building or the entrance does seem to make some sense. (GB Taginfo reports 13,407 out of 30,196 amenity=school
s having an addr:postcode
tag but only 1,628 out of 24,906 building=school
s having one.)
Secondly, the comparison tool will already fetch any node or way with an fhrs:id
set, including building=school
s, and use these in showing matches.
Thirdly, in order for the statistics to be vaguely accurate, it's beneficial for there to be only one OSM entity that would likely match an FHRS establishment. If we add all the building=school
s, there will be 2 OSM entities for each school in the FHRS database.
Thanks again.
OK, fair enough, can't dispute that reasoning! :)
The official tagging schema for schools is to tag amenity=school for the grounds and building=school for school buildings. As I assume the address should be associated with the building, I think you should allow building=school tags as well which may then show more matches. I guess there could be duplicates with amenity=school as well however.