[Tagging] inconsistencies in bridge

[Liz]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:39:53 +0200
Lennard <ldp at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> 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.

You can abandon a railway and still have a something on the ground
which can be identified, ignoring reuse such as rail-trails.
But an abandoned bridge?
Is it still a bridge? or is it broken down and unusable - in which case
it is not a bridge but a broken down ex-bridge.