Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Not all bridge=* are rendered #440

Closed
malenki opened this Issue Mar 27, 2014 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@malenki
Copy link

malenki commented Mar 27, 2014

I'd assume that like with building=* (even building=qwrqwrdaas works) all objects tagged with "bridge" as key and any value except "no" would be rendered as bridge.

Instead the most often used values (except viaduct) like "suspension"¹, "aqueduct"² or "swing"³ don't show as bridges

¹ http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/223011039
² https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/162902290
³ https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/58665511

(split from here)

@dieterdreist

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

dieterdreist commented Mar 27, 2014

Am 27/mar/2014 um 19:35 schrieb malenki notifications@github.com:

Instead the most often used values (except viaduct) like "suspension"¹, "aqueduct"² or "swing"³ don't show as bridges

fwiw, an aqueduct is a water conductor, not a bridge type, bridge tagging should better be sorted out before we start to implement particular rendering rules, currently the tagging is a mess (orthogonal properties as values, and typically no actual bridge object)

@pnorman pnorman added bug labels Mar 28, 2014

@matthijsmelissen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Mar 29, 2014

@1ec5

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

1ec5 commented Mar 29, 2014

fwiw, an aqueduct is a water conductor, not a bridge type

Even so, wouldn’t it make sense to have aqueducts render with the usual bridge casing? Where they cross other features like roads, it should be clear that the aqueduct crosses over like a bridge would. (The wiki suggests that bridge=aqueduct would only be used “for parts of an aqueduct that are bridges”.)

@matthijsmelissen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Mar 29, 2014

I agree that the bridge tagging is currently a mess.

I'm also not in favour of supporting a limited subset of an open set: If we do so, adding more information by specifying a bridge type that is not yet rendered (for example changing bridge=yes into bridge=cantilever_spar_cable-stayed) would cause the bridge not to be rendered anymore. That would discourage people from adding more specific information.

@gravitystorm probably wants to avoid rendering bridge=* as wildcard in order to discourage misspellings. I think therefore either a closed set of bridge types should be defined, or people should tag the type of bridges using a different tag, such as bridge:type.

I think this is a problem that first should be solved on a tagging level. Therefore, I close this issue for now.

@matkoniecz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matkoniecz commented May 7, 2014

So why bridge=viaduct is considered OK and bridge=swing no? At this point I thing that the best solution is to consider bridge=* except bridge=no as a bridge.

@choess

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

choess commented Aug 8, 2014

We have what should hopefully be a stable and flexible bridge tagging scheme documented on the wiki now. It accommodates a lot of these fine details by placing them in the subtags bridge:movable and bridge:structure, so I think the "open set" problem is largely solved. Could we re-open this bug to add, at minimum, support for bridge=movable, and ideally, support for the other tags now enumerated on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge?

mkoniecz: Your solution is not usable because of the large, unstandardized group of values for the bridge key that indicate a bridge is damaged, removed, or otherwise not usable for traffic. Unless these are controlled, it would be a bad idea to assume that they should be mapped as an extant bridge.

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

ghost commented Aug 13, 2014

We have now a fixed set of endorsed bridge values and a subtag system to provide more specific information about bridge architecture etc.

Could you please reconsider drawing the documented values ?

  • yes
  • abandoned
  • aqueduct
  • boardwalk
  • cantilever
  • covered
  • low_water_crossing
  • movable
  • trestle
  • viaduct
@matthijsmelissen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Aug 20, 2014

Could you please reconsider drawing the documented values ?

This is an important change, so I would suggest you start a voting round on the tagging mailing list. From the discussion, I had the impression that there is still no full consensus (which is not necessary, but voting at least shows there is a majority supporting the proposal).

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

ghost commented Aug 20, 2014

Correct me if I am wrong, the change has already been voted and approved?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bridge_types

Should we have another vote or discussion about it on the mailing list? We have improved the wiki a lot since the last discussion so that up to date information is easier to find.

So these are bridge values should be rendered according to the approved proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bridge_types#Bridge_key:_ways_and_relations

Somehow "bridge=abandoned" also slipped into my table (previous comment) but that one I currently do not have an opinion about.

However at least bridge=movable would be very important as those are frequently landmark bridges or important traffic obstacles.

@matthijsmelissen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Aug 20, 2014

Correct me if I am wrong, the change has already been voted and approved?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bridge_types

Sorry, I had missed that. I reopen the issue.

matthijsmelissen added a commit to matthijsmelissen/openstreetmap-carto that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2014

Render all documented bridge types
The chosen bridge types have been discussed and agreed on on the tagging
mailing list.

This resolves gravitystorm#440.
@matthijsmelissen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Sep 25, 2014

I create pull request #979 that renders all types except abandoned. The type 'aqueduct' only renders for waterways, and is (besides 'yes') the only accepted tag for waterways.

matthijsmelissen added a commit to matthijsmelissen/openstreetmap-carto that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2014

Render all documented bridge types
The chosen bridge types have been discussed and agreed on on the tagging
mailing list.

This resolves gravitystorm#440.

matthijsmelissen added a commit to matthijsmelissen/openstreetmap-carto that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2014

Render all documented bridge types
The chosen bridge types have been discussed and agreed on on the tagging
mailing list.

This resolves gravitystorm#440.

matthijsmelissen added a commit to matthijsmelissen/openstreetmap-carto that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2014

Render all documented bridge types
The chosen bridge types have been discussed and agreed on on the tagging
mailing list.

This resolves gravitystorm#440.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.