tagging places in Thailand

It would be helpful if there were an accepted standard format for tags on places. Now place tags in Thailand vary from none at all to 12. (Check any of the villages here http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.4915&lon=98.8688&zoom=13&layers=M for examples of thorough tagging.)

The format could be based on chenwat-amphoe-tamboon-moo, or on addr. There may be a clear advantage to one or the other.

Should the same set of tags should also go on each named street in the town?

Any thoughts?

Most village signs I’ve seen carry the names of village, tambon, amphoe and changwat making it easy to gather them. The is_in tag was described as depreciated in the wiki when I started to tag villages. The addr:* tag was used for places in other areas already. It’s use for places is controversial because you can argue that you can send a letter to a house but not to a place. I documented the extensions for the Thai addressing scheme on the Thailand project and the Key:addr pages.

I prefer extending the addr scheme with the English terms hamlet, subdistrict, district and province. The terms muban, tambon, amphoe, changwat are Thailand specific and can’t be used somewhere else.

I would never tag a highway with addr. Highways can be dividers in villages with more than one muban.

A lot of places miss the simplest thing, the name. (also name in Thai/English). For example here those tagged:

All this is_in tagging is just a workaround for missing administrative boundaries, right?
If you have the boundary of a tambon, you can easily query everything that’s inside and say this IS IN that tambon.

I also strongly vote for not using Thailand specific keyword. This would break all internationally established software.

according to taginfo the addr: tagging is also used in other places.

For streets this is not needed. Try tagging name, name:en, name:th so multilingual maps can be rendered.