[Tagging] Bridges redux

[Richard Fairhurst]

This is generally good. One comment:

Christopher Hoess wrote:
> [...] we might also consider whether "movable" 
> should be under "bridge" or "bridge:type". Placing it in the 
> former would mean patching current renderers (e.g., 
> Mapnik), but placing it in the latter makes specific movable 
> bridge types (e.g., bascule, swing) rather wordy to tag, with 
> three separate keys.

It makes more sense to replace:

bridge=movable; bridge:movable=swing
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=lift
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=bascule
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=drawbridge
bridge=movable; bridge:movable=transporter

with simply

bridge=swing
bridge=lift
bridge=bascule
bridge=drawbridge
bridge=transporter

This removes unnecessary duplication, is more memorable ("is it 'moveable'
or 'movable'...?") and accords with current usage (e.g. 577 occurrences of
bridge=swing).

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Bridges-redux-tp5760227p5760348.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.