I will be fine with bridge=yes, traffic_calming=humpback. But again, as Colin Smale said, we will miss unmarked bridges, without signs. barrier=* is not option here, there no block in any form.
2014-08-10 19:52 GMT+04:00 fly <lowfligh...@googlemail.com>: > Can't we use traffic_calming=hump for this situation or some barrier=*? > > cu fly > > Am 10.08.2014 16:23, schrieb Colin Smale: > > No need to define it as UK-only... such bridges occur across the whole > > world, I am sure. The UK may be unique by having a specific road sign, > > which may indicate that a bridge could/should be tagged as a humpback > > (as stated in the wiki[1]). There is also a sign for explicitly > > indicating a "risk of grounding" often seen at railway crossings. > > > > In the UK it can be made objective by linking the use of the tag to the > > presence of the sign, but then we would miss the many bridges which "the > > average person" would call a hump bridge but are not signed as such. > > > > I would suggest something like "a bridge requiring driving speed to be > > reduced due to the vertical profile" (i.e. not because it is narrow, or > > some other attribute). > > > > Not sure this depends on who is driving by the way, the laws of dynamics > > apply to all of us equally. But I agree that calculating whether a > > particular truck can pass a particular bridge is not easy to put into > > simple tags. It can be rather complex, which is why products like [2] > exist. > > > > --colin > > > > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_the_United_Kingdom > > > > [2] http://www.autopath.co.uk/ > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2014-08-10 15:34, Никита wrote: > > > >> I'm fine with this tag being used in UK. But I care about it's > >> definition. If this tag will be interesting only in some territory, > >> why not to define this tag specific to UK? You didn't answer how we > >> should define "humpiness" of bridge?.. Is this you who minority and > >> cannot pass this bridge without speed reduction or it is me who can > >> drive everywhere at regular speed? This is really subjective. > >> > >> > >> 2014-08-10 16:47 GMT+04:00 Yves <yve...@gmail.com > >> <mailto:yve...@gmail.com>>: > >> > >> There is a lot of things not of interest to the majority of users > >> in OSM, this is why it is rich. > >> Yves > >> > >> > >> On 10 août 2014 12:41:22 UTC+02:00, Colin Smale > >> <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl <mailto:colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>> wrote: > >> > >> On 2014-08-10 12:13, Никита wrote: > >> > >> I.e they define this tag as subtype of > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_bridge [5]. I don't see > >> any real > >> application/use to bridge=humpback. Also, bridge=humpback > >> does not > >> imply covered=yes by default. It does not define routing > >> aspects or > >> adds any features to end users. > >> > >> > >> In the UK there are warning signs for some humpback bridges, > >> and with > >> good reason - if you don't slow down substantially from the > >> ambient > >> speed you will be launched into orbit. Therefore they should > >> be useful > >> for routers, implying a lower speed on that part of the road. > >> > >> > https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120222085933AAsnJiP > >> > >> Some are so "humpy" that a vehicle with a long gap between the > >> axles > >> and/or a low ground clearance (e.g. a low-loader) may actually > >> be unable > >> to cross the bridge. > >> > >> So I don't think it is right to say that bridge=humpback > >> cannot be of > >> value for routing or end users... > >> > >> --colin > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
