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

[Anthony]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 1:13 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2009/9/21 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
> > You clearly define "way" differently than I do, and differently than the
> > current definition.  The bridge most certainly has multiple ways in OSM
> > today.
>
> However that doesn't reflect reality


It does reflect reality.  It just reflects a different part of reality than
you want it to reflect.


> Just because it's tagged with multiple ways doesn't mean it's the best
> way to do it.
>

True.  But it is the best way to do it.

> I never claimed there are 2 bridges.  There is one bridge, with multiple
> > ways.  "bridge" does not equal "way".
>
> But there isn't multiple ways in reality, there is a single "way" or
> bridge with 4 lanes + any footway/cycleways.
>

But there are multiple ways in reality.  A "way" is a path of travel, not a
piece of asphalt.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090920/cca0f309/attachment.html>