[Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[SomeoneElse]

  On 30/08/2010 21:48, Pieren wrote:
> And if you go ahead with this article:
> "When boxes or pipes are placed side-by-side to create a width of 
> greater than twenty feet, the culvert is defined as a bridge in the 
> United States"
>
And if you go on reading it says " This is a requirement of the federal 
bridge inspection standards and ensures that the culvert is inspected on 
a regular basis^ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culvert#cite_note-0> ".  
So in this case doesn't mean "is a bridge" but "the bit over the top is 
defined legally as a bridge so that it has to be inspected to make sure 
that it doesn't collapse in the same way that bridges have to be".

For info, Chambers (a paper dictionary - remember them?) defines it as 
follows:

'culvert, noun.   an arched channel for carrying water beneath a road, 
railway, etc.  [Perhaps from French "couler" to flow - Latin "colare".]'

Naturally, this is a British English definition - it doesn't mean that 
Americans using the word for "any part of the engineering used to send 
water under and something else over" are wrong; they're just speaking a 
different language to me.  The use of British English (actually an 
England-and-Wales only dialect as far as highway types go) in OSM is a 
historical accident, but it's what we've got, and redefining tag use 
based on another dialect or a mixture is likely to just cause a mess.   
Personally I wouldn't object if someone started mapping man-made water 
features in Dutch (they have more words for them) provided that it was 
clear what they meant!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20100831/c0c7ed4c/attachment.html>