Names of ways within squares; What is 'official' mapping practise

Sorry for posting in English in the Italian community but I do not speak Italian whereas the issue might be related to Italy.

I am currently on holiday in Italy and add tags via the StreetComplete App, which makes that task easy by presenting missing tags in (mostly) easily answerable questions.
One of that questions concerns the name of streets or pedestrian zones (thus “highways”). SteetComplete ask this question also for “highways” within a named square (i.e. place=square and name tag set).
The tags added by me via StreetComplete were removed several times by fayor see
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111407406 (with the discussion on this topic with Fayor) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111357465 .

According to Fayor removing the name tags on those highways needs to be done to maintain “One feature, one OSM element”. I consider this argument strange because then also the highways themselves would need to be removed (they are probably just there to allow routing over the square but that leads to strange results if they are not named).

I am definitely not an expert mapper (I do basically everything via StreetComplete) so I raised the issue at the StreetComplete developers (https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3310) because it is rather annoying to get the results of one of the more complicated questions reverted and if “no names to highways within named squares” was official policy, also StreetComplete should follow it to avoid the next guy coming to the same square using StreetComplete to add the tags again. The StreetComplete developers say that in their opinion StreetComplete does things correctly.

Since this name tag removal never happened to me in other countries (or maybe I didn’t notice it there) this might be an Italian speciality, so my question to the Italian community:

Is it really correct that (at least in Italy) highways within named squares should not have an own name tag (with the name of the square)?

Examples (from the above changesets):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/681196317/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/518577586/history

Note that it was discussed on https://t.me/c/1124175268/41519 (Telegram account is required) and conclusion is that such name removal is incorrect.

I reverted mentioned edit in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111562588 and restored correctly mapped names.

Ok, then sorry for duplicating things here.
But apparently having a Telegram account is not enough to read the given URL.I have one and am told that only members of that chat can see the posts.

On the right side of the name input, there is a little ▼ and when you tap on it, it displays the names of nearby roads. With this, it should take you just two taps to add the right name for an unnamed road segment adjacent to a named road segment.

Sorry if I’m reopening an old thread, I’m interested in this topic.

Is Telegram the official channel for making decisions ?
( I also can’t see the Telegram discussion )

There’s no official channel for making decisions, you can use this forum as well (or mailing list).

I reverted mentioned edit in Changeset: 111562588 | OpenStreetMap and restored correctly mapped names.

Just noticed that the name was deleted two more times after your revert (4 times in total): OSM history

no telegram is not.

IMHO the names on the highways on the square should be kept. Sometimes, the streets keep their names even while the cross a square (rarely), you can see it then from the housenumbers.

In the case of the photo (Piazza della Signoria) there are no real streets,
they were artificially created to close the connections of nearby roads.

ok, but this is not a question about “names”.

More OT\ Names of squares and addresses that have the name of the square in the address is another interesting side topic. What’s the name of the street (link) and flags that say the addr:street (with the name of the square) can’t be found because it’s on the square and not any way crossing that area, real or artificial for routing purposes, fully legit BTW. Should names of squares maybe go to addr:place ** since we after all tag square as a place. Would the need for addr:square be something missing, just 14 uses in the TI search.

** addr:place has 10 million uses and wiki page. I know quite a few villages here that essentially has the whole village with the same street name and housenumbers are just one long series leading to street signs that have the civic nummers as a suffix.