[OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?

[Mike Harris]

Claudius - I think you may have answered the question I just asked - thanks
- I must admit that I hadn't seen this proposal before. Once again,
relations prove powerful!

Mike Harris
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Claudius [mailto:claudius.h at gmx.de] 
> Sent: 19 September 2009 14:12
> To: talk at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
> 
> Am 19.09.2009 14:39, Martin Koppenhoefer:
> > 2009/9/19 d f<fac63tempt at yahoo.com>:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I have a bridge carrying a cycle lane, dual carriage way (with 
> >> central reservtion)&  footpath. As far as I can see is 
> they each need 
> >> there own bridge&  the result gets a bit crowded.
> >>
> >> Is there a way to simplify this?
> >> If the bright was independent it could also mean that the ways 
> >> wouldn't need to be split! Saving a hell of a lot of work.
> >
> > There is indeed a problem with bridges (in cases like yours 
> it looks 
> > like several bridges where in reality there is just one, then there 
> > are bridge-names that can differ from the streetname, 
> etc.), but what 
> > do you intent by independant? Do you propose to connect all ways to 
> > one bridge?
> >
> > I would recommend a relation to unify "several bridges" in 
> one (which 
> > gets also the name). Not really more simple to map, but 
> resulting more 
> > accurate and probably could also render nicer.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Martin
> 
> See this bridge/tunnel proposal for reference: 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Bridges_
> and_Tunnels
> 
> Claudius
> 
> 
> 
>