[Tagging] inconsistencies in bridge

[Dave F.]

  On 27/09/2010 15:39, Lennard wrote:
> On 27-9-2010 16:25, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
>> What about abandoned=yes ?
>
> And expect every data consumer to have to parse that in addition to 
> whatever bridge=* value you leave on the data. What's not there 
> anymore is just that: not there anymore. It doesn't deserve a bridge=* 
> tag.

Many railways in the UK, following Doctor Beeching's cuts, were 
abandoned, but much infrastructure, such as bridges, remain, & are unused.

> That's one thing I've never really understood with railway=abandoned 
> either. Sure, many of them have been converted into might fine 
> cycleways, but that's just what they are now: cycleways.

Don't understand your point here.

highway=cycleway
railway=abandoned
bridge=yes

is legitimate & accurate.

Cheers
Dave F.