OptimoRoute Organised Editing Activity in the United States

[Minh_Nguyen (Minh Nguyễn)]

@ElliottPlack

The bridge tag is easy to see and associate with the restriction, whereas a roadway level restriction may be less obvious. In my experience, roadway attribution tags tend to be merged by unscrupulous mappers that are unaware of their being there, such as with lane tagging around intersections. This is of course not an excuse, however it is harder to justify merging a bridge with a road as an accident.

What’s the suggestion for avoiding unscrupulous merging of lanes? I suppose you could always tag the surrounding ways with maxweight=none if overzealous merging is a major concern. You could also map the weight restriction signs themselves so it’s easier to detect and resolve any discrepancy.

@ElliottPlack

In any case, the great bridge vs culvert debate is subjective. There is no right answer. But if the government calls it a bridge, and it has bridge-like properties, I would say it is fine to call it a bridge in OSM.

The great bridge versus culvert debate should probably be a separate thread. I don’t see anything that would be specific to OptimoRoute. The last time we discussed this on the forum, it was buried in a thread about a different mapping team’s bridge weight restriction project.

Adding bridge information in Kentucky and other states

In principle, I’d agree, but I’m finding that so many bridges are incorrectly mapped as culverts and vice versa. Some of that is because of mappers carelessly silencing validator warnings, but I think a lot of it is because mappers have made the same assumptions I used to make: that a bridge is guaranteed to be longer than it is wide, or paved from side to side, or that it must involve a change in pavement quality. I can find many counterexamples for all three assumptions. [A bridge over San …

I had hoped to settle the debate with The Big Fill along California State Route 152: yes, there is a 9-foot-tall (3.7 m) concrete arch, but above that is a 270-foot-tall (82 m) fill, so it makes a lot more sense to depart from the official Caltrans bridge inventory and model it as a surface road over a pipeline culvert.

Fortunately, this particular fill has no bridge weight restriction – not even close. But I could see a much smaller fill over a culvert having a weight restriction for the same reason that a bridge or a surface road subject to frost laws would have one: to avoid crushing something fragile underneath.