[OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
Roy Wallace
waldo000000 at gmail.com
Sun Sep 20 22:11:06 BST 2009
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:09 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/9/21 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
>> > Define "physically separated".
>>
>> The road base finishes or there is a concreate barrier or other form
>> of barrier that would prevent a car crossing, legally or otherwise.
>>
>> > Do you admit that a physical bridge can carry multiple ways, or not? I
>>
>> A bridge is a single way
>
> Even if there is a concrete barrier or other form of barrier that would
> prevent a car crossing? Why are bridges different?
Yep, John, you've contradicted yourself.
You said "A way is a physical feature physically seperated from other ways"
Then you said "physcially separated" means e.g. "a concrete barrier".
Therefore, a bridge with a concrete barrier separating lanes *carries
multiple ways* - which you then deny, saying "A bridge is a single
way".
Please clarify your interpretation of a *way*, or of *physical
separation*, so that you make sense.
More information about the talk
mailing list