On 9 August 2011 14:30, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:06 PM, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> How is this fundementally different than any other disused bridge? > > Overnight destruction is noteworthy, whereas slow decay into disuse is > not. There are signs and safety barriers around the destroyed bridges, > there are detours in place. A big red, eye-catching cross on a > destroyed bridge makes sense - locals would probably know the bridge > and expect it to be there, so the big red cross alerts them to the > change.
You haven't really described how they are fundamentally different, stuff left to decay usually has signs etc put up as well. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
