[Tagging] bridge=humpback ?

[Colin Smale]

On 2014-08-10 12:13, Никита wrote:

> I.e they define this tag as subtype of 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_bridge [5]. I don't see any real 
> application/use to bridge=humpback. Also, bridge=humpback does not 
> imply covered=yes by default. It does not define routing aspects or 
> adds any features to end users.

In the UK there are warning signs for some humpback bridges, and with 
good reason - if you don't slow down substantially from the ambient 
speed you will be launched into orbit. Therefore they should be useful 
for routers, implying a lower speed on that part of the road.

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120222085933AAsnJiP

Some are so "humpy" that a vehicle with a long gap between the axles 
and/or a low ground clearance (e.g. a low-loader) may actually be unable 
to cross the bridge.

So I don't think it is right to say that bridge=humpback cannot be of 
value for routing or end users...

--colin