Re: [Tagging] Bridge relations. Is that a 'thing'?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 16.02.2016 um 22:15 schrieb Holger Jeromin :
> 
> 
> I am not sure which questions are not answered by finding all ways
> inside the outline with the same layer. 


as an example: bridges on several layers, particularly with other objects 
crossing in between, e.g. a bridge at layer 1 and 3 with another bridge at 
layer 2 in between, I am not saying that this is happening frequently ;-)

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bridge relations. Is that a 'thing'?

[Holger Jeromin]

Dave F 
 Wrote in message:
> Hi
> 
> Recent addition in my neck of the woods:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5979157
> 
> A relations collecting together the bridge outline & all the lanes. It's 
> the first I've come across. Are they widespread.
> 
> IMO I can't quite see the point of it & to me, comes under the heading 
> 'relations aren't meant to be collections of things'.
> 
> Opinions?

The concept is quite old 

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Bridges_and_
Tunnels

About 4000 relations are tagged. 

I think with the current rendering in OSM carto of the outline
 (man_made=bridge) most mapper will stop with the outline. One
 main problem (bridge name is not highway name) is elegantly
 solved with the outline. 

I am not sure which questions are not answered by finding all ways
 inside the outline with the same layer. 

-- 
Holger


Android NewsGroup Reader
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bridge relations. Is that a 'thing'?

[Richard]

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 08:02:20PM +, Dave F wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Recent addition in my neck of the woods:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5979157
> 
> A relations collecting together the bridge outline & all the lanes. It's the
> first I've come across. Are they widespread.

in this case it would seem like a clear overkill. man_made=bridge
would be prefered for such simple cases. 

Relations may make sense when there are other (than ways) objects/features 
on top of the bridge but even then you might try

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simplify_man_made%3Dbridge_mapping#Objects_on_bridges

Richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Bridge relations. Is that a 'thing'?

[Dave F]

Hi

Recent addition in my neck of the woods:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5979157

A relations collecting together the bridge outline & all the lanes. It's 
the first I've come across. Are they widespread.


IMO I can't quite see the point of it & to me, comes under the heading 
'relations aren't meant to be collections of things'.


Opinions?

Cheers
Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging