[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Bridge types)

Dave Swarthout daveswarthout at gmail.com
Tue Oct 1 05:30:19 UTC 2013

I'm a total newbie to OSM proposals and discussions like this one so let me
apologize in advance for this off topic post.

I'm still following along but I'm wondering how a person will ever see this
sort of detail in a map. I confess I mostly work on OSM so I can get
detailed and correct maps for use in a Garmin GPS in the areas I live and
work in, Alaska and Thailand primarily. I get all my maps from Lambertus at
garmin.openstreetmap.nl and while his rendering isn't perfect it serves my
purposes well enough.

Can one of you suggest a site where I can see details like those you

On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:34 PM, François Lacombe <
francois.lacombe at telecom-bretagne.eu> wrote:

> Ok fly, sorry for this sidetrack on the main thread ;)
> Nevertheless, +1 for separating structures (bridges, tunnel) from features
> (roads, rails, ...).
> But all this (tunnels, bridges, culverts) need a better support of
> layering and extra attributes like elevation beside lat & lon.
> *François Lacombe*
> francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu
> http://www.infos-reseaux.com
> 2013/9/30 fly <lowflight66 at googlemail.com>
>> Am 30.09.2013 18:19, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>> >
>> > 2013/9/30 Philip Barnes <phil at trigpoint.me.uk <mailto:
>> phil at trigpoint.me.uk>>
>> >
>> >     And canal tunnels, there is usually a towpath through the same
>> >     tunnel, but we have to map them as separate tunnels, then there are
>> >     double track railway tunnels.
>> >
>> > IMHO this is the same as for bridges: we don't have a general standard
>> > how to map a bridge or a tunnel, all we (there are exceptions, speaking
>> > about the general consensus how "normal" mapping is done) currently do
>> > is attaching an attribute to a road (or sth. else) stating that it is on
>> > a bridge or in a tunnel, but we do not map the bridge or tunnel itself.
>> >
>> > The solution could be a bridge object or a tunnel object (could be
>> > either geometry or a relation) which would represent the actual
>> > structure, would get tags like name (name of the bridge / tunnel, not of
>> > the road, i.e. goodbye bridge_name), and so on. In the case of geometry
>> > this would be an area outlining the feature, in the case of relations I
>> > think there is already a proposal, but not very much used.
>> Sure, man_made=bridge/tunnel for the outline and bridge/tunnel relation
>> which are often both needed.
>> fly
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131001/f5b9d23a/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list