[OSM-talk] No_comments=yes

[Robert Hart]

> Here is a different suggestion going the other way: We could use the
> bridge
> and tunnel keys for actually naming the bridge/tunnel. It is quite
> common for bridges or tunnels to have names. Those names are distinct
> from the names of the road which goes over the bridge or through the
> tunnel. Currently there is no way to keep those apart. So I suggest
> having
> 
>   bridge=Waterloo Bridge
> 
> or
> 
>   tunnel=Gotthardt Tunnel
> 
> This has the advantage of beeing backwards compatible.
bridge/tunnel=yes
> just gets the new meaning of "name unknown or non-existent".
> 

Urgh.

If the bridge and the road have different names then they should be
different ways, no?

I *could* see bridge=suspension, bridge=cablestay, bridge=arch, etc. in
addition to simply tunnel=yes and similarly for tunnels (but I'll leave
that one to blackadder)

That to me also counters the OP question assertion that thing=yes tags
are bad. 

To my mind something=yes implies generic rendering of a "something",
which would be used for any unknown value of "something". 

I'm happy to admit we aren't very consistent, as things like
leisure=something or amenity=something are not specific enough for "yes"
to be valid responses, and therefore it's difficult to provide generic
rendering, but that's besides the point.


This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl - www.mailcontrol.com