On 7 August 2014 18:35, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > yes, aqueducts will usually also have bridges as parts of them (not all, > some even run underground for instance). > Not true. In California the aqueducts look like navigable canals, but carry drinking water. > Still this is a completely different kind of typology than other values in > the bridge key. E.g. the bridge you refer to could also be categorized as > trough bridge. "aqueduct" and "viaduct" are classifications that refer to > the way that runs on the bridge, > I do not agree: "A *viaduct* is a bridge composed of several small spans" according to Wikipeda, and that is a construction aspect not a property of the way on top of the bridge. In that sense Aqueduct and Viaduct are two different categories (even though the original Latin meaning would point in your direction, Martin) > > > That's why I propose to use several tags to (potentially) describe > different aspects like structure, material, etc. > > I fully agree with that statement, but there seems to be no common practice on how to do that But this is not the original argument of this thread. I think the distinction between swing and suspension bridge is clear. Volker
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
