Since we're all chiming in, I have to say, I don't see what's wrong with "highway=footway, bridge=yes". That's exactly how I would tag similar instances, like a pedestrian overpass over a freeway, which looks extremely similar to this thing.
Inventing a new "ramp:elevated" tag seems a bit pointless. The distinction between a bridge and an "elevated ramp" is a matter of hair-splitting. We don't really gain much by inventing a new tag for every object which is slightly different from existing categories. Actually, now that I look at the definition of Key:ramp, that doesn't look like the right tag for the job. That tag is about micromapping accessibility features of a set of stairs, not describing a large walkway in its own right. I can see general purpose most renderers always ignoring the tag, meaning your "elevated ramp" will be rendered like a footpath on the ground. Steve On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:53 AM, Trevor Hook <[email protected]> wrote: > I have decided the best description for this structure is a ramp, so I have > tagged it as follows. > > highway=footway > layer=1 > surface=wood > ramp=yes > ramp:wheelchair=yes > ramp:elevated=yes > > The last tag is a new one I have just created, I have added a comment to the > talk page of key:ramp to detail what I have done and why. > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Bill Ricker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The wiki is not the finite answer. If it's lacking an item, add it, be >> >> only if needed, and on the Newbies list, the answer should be Ask, not >> Add, as in this case. >> >>> >>> it aerial_path or Catwalk etc. >> >> would likely be overly detailed if there's anything generally right >> >>> so viaduct could be used. >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viaduct >> >> Good point, a foot viaduct is what it is. >> >> But again you quote Wikipedia to choose OSM tags. OSM is not whole >> language but a smaller tagging vocabulary for a database. >> >> In OSM schema, it turns out Viaduct was rejected as a tag and accepted as >> a value. >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Viaduct >>> >>> Status: Obsoleted (inactive) >>> This proposal has been obsoleted by the approved "Bridge" proposal. >> >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bridge >>> >>> There is a single "bridge=<type>" tag: >>> >>> bridge=yes >>> bridge=aqueduct >>> bridge=viaduct >>> bridge=swing >>> bridge=... >> >> so i suggest >> >> highway=footway, bridge=viaduct, >> >> and at least in the WDW case where we will be adding footway and service >> ways beneath, >> layer=1 >> although the squirrels and hedgehogs won't have layer=0 paths to conflict >> in the treetop case, there might be a ground level nature trail as well. >> >> (Why not tag with best word from wikipedia even if not otherwise used in >> OSM? While we don't tag for one render, we also don't tag to make the >> renderes' job impossible either; a custom tag usevid nowhere else will NEVER >> render unless the author provides patches to each renderer, and other >> database uses won't know what to make of it either.) >> >> -- >> Bill >> [email protected] [email protected] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> newbies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies >> > > > _______________________________________________ > newbies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies > > _______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
