[Tagging] inconsistencies in bridge

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/9/27 Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com>:
>  On 27/09/2010 13:51, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> I agree that this is the same problem. It isn't a good reason to keep
>> bridge=abandoned IMHO. You could workaround with railway=abandoned,
>> abandoned=tram, but for bridge the wiki states: bridge=<type>  and
>> "abandoned" is clearly not part of a typology vocabulary.
>
> Whilst I understand what you're doing; I think you should have come up with
> an alternative & listed it in the wiki before deleting.


I was thinking about this (that's why I wrote to this list before I
actually deleted it). But then I made up my mind and removed it
(notifying everybody here, so that it doesn't get lost). I can't find
solutions for all problems that arise, but at least I can in case of
inconsistencies (like here, where bridge=<type> seems undisputed, and
abandoned "not equal" type as well) bring up the problem (so that a
solution can be collaboratively found and the page be amended) and
remove the inconsistency.

I wouldn't do this for a tag that was voted upon, but if someone is
allowed to put nonsense to established tag-pages without notifying or
proposing or voting I think I have the same right to remove them.

There is already different approaches to tag the status of an object,
one pointless (because doesn't contain any information) page is here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:status

cheers,
Martin