Skip to content

Use postalcode layer instead of postal_code for OSM records - #147

Merged
missinglink merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix-osm-postal_code-layer
Aug 18, 2026
Merged

Use postalcode layer instead of postal_code for OSM records#147
missinglink merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix-osm-postal_code-layer

Conversation

@orangejulius

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This matches the layer used by WOF. Without this normalization, it's impossible to return both WOF and OSM postalcodes with a single layers= param for endpoints that support it.

@orangejulius
orangejulius requested review from Copilot and missinglink and removed request for Copilot July 28, 2026 21:16
This matches the layer used by WOF. Without this normalization, it's
impossible to return both WOF and OSM postalcodes with a single
`layers=` param for endpoints that support it.
@orangejulius
orangejulius force-pushed the fix-osm-postal_code-layer branch from e535a26 to bd601ab Compare July 31, 2026 18:47
@missinglink

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hmm yeah, this highlights a bit of an issue with multiple-sources in that there needs to be a point where the disparate schemas become cohesive, or the API consumer will always need to understand and navigate the nuances of every source's schema.

I think for now this is fine, in the future we may want to define a set of ENUMs which enumerate the available layers, such that spatial provides a generic view of all available layers across all datasets.

@missinglink
missinglink merged commit 4c82770 into master Aug 18, 2026
7 checks passed
@missinglink
missinglink deleted the fix-osm-postal_code-layer branch August 18, 2026 12:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants