This is generally good. One comment:
Christopher Hoess wrote:
> [...] we might also consider whether "movable"
> should be under "bridge" or "bridge:type". Placing it in the
> former would mean patching current renderers (e.g.,
> Mapnik), but placing it in the latter makes specific movable
> bridge types (e.g., bascule, swing) rather wordy to tag, with
> three separate keys.
It makes more sense to replace:
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=swing
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=lift
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=bascule
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=drawbridge
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=transporter
with simply
bridge=swing
bridge=lift
bridge=bascule
bridge=drawbridge
bridge=transporter
This removes unnecessary duplication, is more memorable ("is it 'moveable'
or 'movable'...?") and accords with current usage (e.g. 577 occurrences of
bridge=swing).
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Bridges-redux-tp5760227p5760348.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
