On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:20 AM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > > A bridge should probably have its > own geometry. And if a bridge has its own geometry (polygon or line and > width) and a layer tag you don't even need the relation, do you? Anything > in the area of the bridge with the same layer is located on the bridge.
I like the idea. BUT I shouldn't have to measure the bridge to be able to indicate that a section of way(s) goes over a bridge. Using an area to mark a bridge in this way should be *optional*, in the same was as a POI can be marked as a node or an area. Therefore, a "bridge" relation would still be useful to indicate that multiple ways share a bridge, for when the bridge geometry is unknown. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
