Yeah, traffic_calming was bad idea too, we use it for artificial objects with purpose of calming traffic.
Back to the topic: "a bridge requiring driving speed to be reduced due to the vertical profile (i.e. not because it is narrow, or some other attribute)". Is okay definition, but we must add reference for not-UK users that there specific road sign for this in UK. Mappers should only apply this tag if there risk for some category of drivers and not just any bridge with varying attitude. So be it. 2014-08-10 20:14 GMT+04:00 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>: > It is neither constructed with the intention of calming traffic, nor is > it intended as any kind of barrier (a bridge is usually exactly the > opposite!) Let us not be afraid of using a different tag for what is > clearly a different attribute. > > --colin > > > On 2014-08-10 17:52, fly wrote: > > 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 > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_the_United_Kingdom>]). > 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 <http://www.autopath.co.uk/>] 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 > listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://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
