[Tagging] bridge:name and tunnel:name

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sun Aug 23 13:43:16 UTC 2020


On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 13:31, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:

> I guess that what we have is another case of two (in reality three)
> tagging practices for (nearly) the same thing.
>

Yep.  My increasingly-fallible memory may be letting me down here, but
I have a vague recollection of bridge:name being introduced because some
people were unhappy with using name for the name of the bridge.  They
argued that name should be the name of the road and bridge:name should
be used for the name of the bridge.  Which did nothing to change all
the existing bridges mapped the old way, and didn't get incorporated
in carto immediately (has it been, yet?) so the old way was still used.
In some cases, both names have been used (presumably to get the
name to render).

name=* for a tunnel's name that is mapped with tunnel=yes seems to be
> common practice (at least 760 motorway tunnels in Italy are tagged this
> way).
>

This part of the UK has a LOT of named bridges.  Since they are more
picturesque than tunnels, they often get mentioned in tourist guides,
walking guides, etc.  A lot of photos of them on geograph and
wikimedia.  So they tend to get mapped, one way or another.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200823/61737856/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list