NOTE 1 For the assignment of unambiguous locators (e.g. address numbers) different rules exists in different countries and regions. According to the most common rule, an address number should be unique within the scope of the thoroughfare name. In other areas the address number is unique inside an address area name (e.g. the name of the village) or postal designator (e.g. the post code). In some areas even a combination of rules are applied: e.g. addresses with two locators, each of them referencing to a separate address component. NOTE 2 Locators that has the level of unit (like e.g. floor identifier and door or unit identifiers) are most often assigned so that they are unambiguous within the more narrow scope of the property or building; for these locators the association should therefore not be populated. EXAMPLE 1 In a typical European address dataset, parts of the addresses have locators which are unambiguous within the scope of the road name (thoroughfare name) while others are unambiguous within the name ogf the village or district (address area name). EXAMPLE 2 In Lithuania and Estonia a concept of "corner addresses" exists. Corner addresses have two address numbers (designators) each of them referring to a thoroughfare name (primary and secondary street name). E.g. in Vilnius the address designated "A. Stulginskio gatve 4 / A. Smetonos gatve 7" is situated on the corner of the two streets. EXAMPLE 3 In the Czech Republic in some cities an address has two locator designators: A building number which referres to the address area (district, cz: "cast obce") and a address number that referres to the thoroughfare name. As an example in Praha for address designated "Na Pankráci 1690/125, Nusle" the designator "1690" is a building number unique within the address area (cz cast obce) "Nusle", while the "125" is an address number that has the thoroughfare name as its scope.