[OSM-newbies] rivers, roads, and bridges ...

[Thomas Meller]

Hi Robert,

as for the rendering of waterways, there is not really a need to tag them, but there are opportunities where the ways don't cross the normal way.
The 'canal du midi' for example crosses a river and a road, does not intersect with either and is always on the upmost layer.

If you don't mind the layers matter, there is no need to tag them.
In case of important waterways, I'd always tag the crossing ways.

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:21:11 +0900
> Von: "Robert Helvie" <alimamo at gmail.com>
> An: newbies at openstreetmap.org
> Betreff: [OSM-newbies] rivers, roads, and bridges ...

> 
> It is pretty obvious that you need to make a section of the way into a
> bridge if you have something like a road rising over train tracks, a road
> dipping below train tracks, one road rising or dipping over/under the
> other,
> flyovers, and actual bridges over major rivers.
> 
> But is it really necessary (or at least what is the common practice) to
> create bridges for roads that cross minor rivers or streams with no rise,
> or
> where the water just passes under the road in a couple of box culverts?
> 
> It is obvious on a render that a river and road don't connect, but is
> there
> some necessity for a bridge due to (future?) rendering conditions or
> possible routing software? Or would the use of the "layer" tag be good
> enough? (Though how to implement the layer tag is still a bit muddy to me.
> [Water related pun intended.] )
> ...
> Thanks
> 
> alimamo (Robert)

-- 
GMX Download-Spiele: Preizsturz! Alle Puzzle-Spiele Deluxe über 60% billiger.
http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/download/puzzle/index.html