Proposed features/Bridge Type
|Tagging:||bridge_type=manual_swing, powered_swing, ...|
|Applies to:||node or way|
|Definition:||Specifies what sort of bridge it is, for better rendering and for navigational use|
|Rendered as:||Various bridge icons|
This proposal has been obsoleted by the approved "Bridge" proposal.
It is useful to know what sort of bridge a bridge is, in order to e.g. use an appropriate icon, or (perhaps on canals) to know whether you need to get the kids up to move the swing bridge in five minutes time.
bridge_type=manual_swing, powered_swing, ...
Different bridge icons for different types of bridge
- Re the discussion on the mailing list regarding using bridge=yes, bridge_type=<bridge_type> versus bridge=<bridge type value>. I support the latter. It is very easy to use and I think will encourage faster gathering of specific information about bridge types. It has been working well experimentally for the building= tag. building=yes is used where you don't know (or don't care) what type it is or you can use anything else to describe the type. If a renderer does not recognise what you entered, it treats it as 'yes'. Other mappers can change it later. MikeCollinson 11:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'd like to see a definition of powered swing and manual swing, because there are multiple types: bridges with a bridge keeper and bridges without one and as a sailor I see these as respectively as automatic and manual, but of course in both cases the actual mechanism might be powered or not. And what is the type of a bridge with no swing at all? Besides that I like the tags as proposed by Ulfl the most. --Steven te Brinke 16:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- It seems like this proposal is superceded by the new bridge proposal which MikeCollinson mentioned above. Should it perhaps be withdrawn? --Hawke 20:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
...is not open yet.