2009/9/21 Anthony <[email protected]>: > Irrelevant. I never said you had to use relations. In fact, I said you > don't.
Others have suggested otherwise, to "group" ways that are on the same physical bridge. > I wouldn't call the use of relations "nutty", though. I was referring to a specific use case. > Fine. You can add "maximum height" along with "maximum speed" to your list > of lane-specific data. > > I don't find it very important, but if you want to allow for this, without > messing up anyone else, feel free. I don't find people tagging botanical names on plants useful either, but they're doing it because they feel it is important. At present I am not easily able to tag individual lanes, but would love to be able to do it. >> Ever been on a bridge with dynamic lane changes depending on time of day? > > Yes. At present how exactly would you tag it? > So you think those examples should all be represented as a single way? > > That's horrible. What exactly is so horrible about it exactly, they are all part of the same physical way, but there is various lanes and being able to tag them individually would make a lot more sense than trying to plot multiple parallel ways. > The maximum speed of a way is the maximum speed of that way. If you want to > *also* tag lane speeds, feel free. But that isn't reflecting life, it's reducing it and in turn loosing information. > http://bikelaneblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/pulaski-bridge-walkway.jpg?w=324&h=241 > > One bridge or two? > > If it's one, then you are off-topic. Please explain exactly how that is two bridges, it's physically one bridge with multiple lanes even if one of those lanes isn't for cars. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
