[OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC open - new key - aqueduct=yes

[matthew-osm at newtoncomputing.co.uk]

Hi Gerv,

On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 09:35:42AM +0000, Gervase Markham wrote:
> Gervase Markham wrote:
> > Currently, we have "waterway=aqueduct" on nodes only. It seems to me to 
> > make much more sense to treat aqueducts like bridges, with which they 
> > are closely analogous. So we should replace it with "aqueduct=yes", 
> > applicable to nodes or ways.
> > 
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Aqueduct
> 
> The (limited) consensus on this page seems to be that we should abandon 
> aqueduct= and viaduct= and just use bridge= for everything.
> 
> While it seems to me that this isn't current consensus or practice, it 
> isn't necessarily nuts; I've already proposed bridge_type, and someone 
> has said that it's easier to have alternative values for bridge, so 
> instead of bridge=yes, we have bridge=motorised_swing, etc.
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Bridge_Type
> 
> So why not bridge=viaduct, bridge=aqueduct?

You might want to look at the discussion a few weeks ago:

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-January/022583.html

Personally, I share your view about the bridge= tag, having a
basic dislike for boolean values unless absolutely necessary.

Someone suggested structure= - I quite like that (it also solves
the "viaduct isn't a bridge" argument from Andy ;-) ).

Cheers,

-- 
Matthew