[Talk-us] Bridge naming
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Jul 2 00:19:28 UTC 2013
2013/7/2 Martijn van Exel <m at rtijn.org>
> There are actually several approaches suggested on the Bridge wiki on how
> to tag bridge names. The above cases represent the first approach: using
> the name tag. This may not be appropriate everywhere, however: if the road
> running across the bridge has a street name, wouldn't it be more
> appropriate to reserve the name= tag for the street name and put the bridge
> name in a name_1 or bridge:name tag? (The wiki suggests this in approach
> #2. There is also an approach using bridge / tunnel relations. I am not a
> big fan of that one myself).
> Disadvantage of using a separate tag for bridge names is that they won't
> get rendered on the default map, as far as I know. (Though that can be
> changed.) The advantage is that the road itself maintains consistent
> naming, in concordance with what I feel is the proper use of the name tag -
> namely to reflect the official (signposted) name of the street.
IMHO we mostly don't map bridges yet, they are only implicit as an
attribute for a road (or railway) that runs over a bridge (bridge=yes on
the highway). In this mapping, it seems logical to use name for the name of
the road (highway) and bridge:name for the name of the bridge that it is
on. As soon as you map a bridge object (e.g. with a bridge relation or with
a (closed?) bridge way) you would use its name tag for the bridge name.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us