>>148のソース
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/7943/september-ama-responses-and-roadmap-update
> What types of bridges are and aren't eligible?の項の
> With regard to bridges generally, if it is accessible by foot and expected to be used as part of a named path or trail, it would meet criteria. Bridges that primarily serve cars and don't have pedestrian access are not eligible.
が該当するが、承認対象になる"a named path and trail"と否認対象の"primarily serve cars"をどう解釈するかだね
日本の橋は大抵幅が狭めな道路にかかり(pathやtrailとも拡大解釈できそうな細い道)車も歩行者もまあまあ通る(車主体ではないと主張することもできる)からこの文だと
・車が通らない名のある道の橋はOK
・歩道のない橋はNG
くらいしか言えず結局今までと何も変わらないような気がする