[OSM-talk] The Return of the Highway tags and other junk

[Ben Robbins]

>I can't remember if this is in Proposed_Features, or was on the mailing 
>list or
>IRC, but I seem to remember proposing bridge=viaduct

I had not read that, where ever it appeared, but...  Bridge=viaduct is a 
specific tag, and seems wasteful of a key, and would mean other examples 
need keys of there own.
feature=tunnel, or feature=steps, or feature=walkway, would not fit under 
''Bridge''.  All these are objects/things that fall along the way.

>As for my tags for the above

  >highway=track
  >foot=permissive
  >bridge=viaduct
  >railway=abandoned

>and on certain nodes

  >highway=gate
>or
  >highway=cattle_grid

>railway=narrow_gauge is not needed if railway=abandoned is present - the 
>tracks
>have been removed (it would be a problem with railway=preserved, so should
>probably be railway_gauge=narrow, but that is not the case here.)

In tagging it like this, data has been lost, or incorrectly mapped.  The 
highway is a footway.  The tracks type is unclear.  What the railway was is 
unclear, and is nessesery as some people may wish to know.  Gates and 
cattle_grids are not infinitly small features, so should not be nodes, as 
this fails to give information about them.

I object to the idea that a person cant tag valid relevent information 
becasue others don't wish to tag it themselves.  If that was the case, I 
would have no highway=motorway tag, just cause I don't need it.  Others 
would then be limited.

Ben

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ Messenger has arrived. Click here to download it for free!  
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/?locale=en-gb