No need to define it as UK-only... such bridges occur across the whole world, I am sure. The UK may be unique by having a specific road sign, which may indicate that a bridge could/should be tagged as a humpback (as stated in the wiki[1]). There is also a sign for explicitly indicating a "risk of grounding" often seen at railway crossings.
In the UK it can be made objective by linking the use of the tag to the presence of the sign, but then we would miss the many bridges which "the average person" would call a hump bridge but are not signed as such. I would suggest something like "a bridge requiring driving speed to be reduced due to the vertical profile" (i.e. not because it is narrow, or some other attribute). Not sure this depends on who is driving by the way, the laws of dynamics apply to all of us equally. But I agree that calculating whether a particular truck can pass a particular bridge is not easy to put into simple tags. It can be rather complex, which is why products like [2] exist. --colin [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_the_United_Kingdom [2] http://www.autopath.co.uk/ On 2014-08-10 15:34, Никита wrote: > I'm fine with this tag being used in UK. But I care about it's definition. If > this tag will be interesting only in some territory, why not to define this > tag specific to UK? You didn't answer how we should define "humpiness" of > bridge?.. Is this you who minority and cannot pass this bridge without speed > reduction or it is me who can drive everywhere at regular speed? This is > really subjective. > > 2014-08-10 16:47 GMT+04:00 Yves <yve...@gmail.com>: > > There is a lot of things not of interest to the majority of users in OSM, > this is why it is rich. > Yves > > On 10 août 2014 12:41:22 UTC+02:00, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> > wrote: > > On 2014-08-10 12:13, Никита wrote: > > I.e they define this tag as subtype of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_bridge [1] [5]. I don't see any real > application/use to bridge=humpback. Also, bridge=humpback does not > imply covered=yes by default. It does not define routing aspects or > adds any features to end users. > In the UK there are warning signs for some humpback bridges, and with > good reason - if you don't slow down substantially from the ambient > speed you will be launched into orbit. Therefore they should be useful > for routers, implying a lower speed on that part of the road. > > https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120222085933AAsnJiP [2] > > Some are so "humpy" that a vehicle with a long gap between the axles > and/or a low ground clearance (e.g. a low-loader) may actually be unable > to cross the bridge. > > So I don't think it is right to say that bridge=humpback cannot be of > value for routing or end users... > > --colin > > ------------------------- > > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [3] -- Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [3] _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [3] Links: ------ [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_bridge [2] https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120222085933AAsnJiP [3] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
