[Talk-us] Bridge naming

Clay Smalley claysmalley at gmail.com
Tue Jul 2 00:22:38 UTC 2013


I think it makes perfect sense to separate it into name=* and bridge:name=*
tags. The bridge:name=* currently isn't rendered, but theoretically, it
could be rendered differently and in a more appropriate/eye-catching way
than name=*. This leaves the case though, what if a bridge doesn't carry a
street name but only a bridge name (such as the aforementioned Golden Gate
Bridge and Brooklyn Bridge)?


On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Martijn van Exel <m at rtijn.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thinking about bridge naming. Usually, a bridge will just have the same
> name as the ways surrounding it. In those cases, the name= tag on the
> bridge should just be the same as the name= tag on the connecting ways,
> right?
>
> Here's an example:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/172208150
>
> On the other end of the spectrum, there's iconic bridges that everyone
> knows by their specific name, like the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate
> Bridge. These both have the specific bridge name as the name= tag on the
> corresponding way(s):
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/122660450
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52477381
>
> There are actually several approaches suggested on the Bridge wiki on how
> to tag bridge names[1]. 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.
>
> How do you all feel about this? Bridge name on separate tag where the road
> has a name itself or not?
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge - see 'How to map'
>  --
> Martijn van Exel
> http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
> http://openstreetmap.us/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20130701/7999c620/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list