One reason it would be useful to be able to tag bridges (and, to a lesser
extent, tunnels) as single physical objects is that they may be used as
landmarks. For example, you may be traveling along a street that runs parallel
to a river, looking for a location just past a certain bridge. If the renderer
showed three bridges, for example, due to the tagging, but there is really just
one bridge, you may end up going past your intended destination before
realizing that the map didn't match reality.
Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>On 05/giu/2013, at 11:30, François Lacombe
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> We don't need to create dedicated geometry for an highway tunnel
>since the geometry of the road gives the path followed by this tunnel.
>
>
>
>for Road tunnels this is mostly true, but if you look at caves or mines
>it is different. I was more pointing at bridges here anyway.
>
>
>> So we can precise it in the "role" attribute of the tunnel/bridge
>relation member which tube the road way represent. Since OSM doesn't
>manage relation member attributes at all, it will be difficult.
>
>
>of course relations can have tags - it is up to the consumer to do sth
>with them
>
>cheers,
>Martin
>_______________________________________________
>Tagging mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
