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

[Roy Wallace]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> John seems to combine everything into a single way and treat the individual
> "lanes" (some of the substructures aren't even really lanes) as
> substructures.  Some people want to break every lane into a separate way,
> and combine them into superstructures.  Frankly, these two plans are
> essentially equivalent.

Except that a superstructure of elements is already implemented (a relation).

> Personally, I don't want either of those.  I want the way to be whatever
> logical unit is used for routing.

This seems selfish (but thanks for being honest :)). Not everyone uses
OSM for routing. The ultimate, all-inclusive goal should always be an
accurate map of what exists in the world.

(By the way, don't forget that a "way" is just "a series of nodes". A
"way" itself has no meaning until given one with tags. For example, a
building outline is a way, but you certainly can't be routed around a
building outline.)