2014-08-07 17:25 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. <ricoz....@gmail.com>: > > Wondering what to do with that? With just 687 objects worldwide the problem > would be easily fixable.. just how?
I think tagging the type of bridge as road attribute might be an exxageration. We should start mapping bridges as objects (area) and then add relevant detail like bridge typology to this. Maybe man_made=bridge? and bridge:type? This object could get further attributes so that they can be combined. Current bridge values (the road attribute) are a mess: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/bridge#values viaduct <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=viaduct> 39 055 1.76% ✔ A ''long'' rail, road, or other bridge made up of many short spans. no <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=no> 6 987 0.32% - suspension <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=suspension> 2 035 0.09% ✔ aqueduct <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=aqueduct> 1 821 0.08% - abandoned <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=abandoned> 776 0.04% - culvert <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=culvert> 734 0.03% - swing <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bridge=swing> "culvert" isn't a bridge type at all (in my understanding), neither is aqueduct. IMHO we should distinguish between different aspects (there is not 1 bridge typology, but there are more systems, e.g. by type of construction and construction material, by shape, by function/features, etc.). See also here for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge#Types_of_bridges cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
