<div dir="ltr">Andre wrote: "<span style="font-size:16px">I once wrote an OVERLAY suggestion (to be discussed, that I much improved since) that generalizes the principle of an overlay way segment that, in one of its usages, applies tags such as speed limit to a segment of the highway."</span><div><span style="font-size:16px"><br></span></div><div>Now that is an idea I love. Splitting roadways to create a bridge or a section with more or fewer lanes or a different speed limit is a big job and there is no easy way to automate it. Adding an overlay to sections of road seems like a wonderful solution similar to the man_made=bridge idea. Where is your original proposal located?</div><div><br></div><div>However, your method of putting an entire waterway at layer=-2 seems a bit bold and goes against common usage. It may be convenient but how can you claim it's correct? The layer entry in the Wiki states:</div><div>"</div><ul style="line-height:1.5em;margin:0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em;padding:0px;color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:17.5px"><li style="margin-bottom:0.1em">Use the smallest suitable layer value. Only use layer=2 for a bridge that passes over a feature that is already at level 1; similarly only use layer=-2 for a tunnel that passes below another tunnel. For convenience some higher values are often locally used/reserved for very long bridges or underground networks where it is assumed that they are above/bellow most other crossings/objects in the area.</li></ul><div><font color="#252525" face="sans-serif"><span style="font-size:17.5px;line-height:26.25px">Cheers,</span></font></div><div><font color="#252525" face="sans-serif"><span style="font-size:17.5px;line-height:26.25px">Dave</span></font></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:08 AM, Ian Sanders <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:iansan5653@gmail.com" target="_blank">iansan5653@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Can you send an example of that culvert tagging? Generally the tunnel and bridge tags should be on the way that the tunnel or bridge is made for.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 5:08 PM André Pirard <<a href="mailto:a.pirard.papou@gmail.com" target="_blank">a.pirard.papou@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>On 2015-10-25 07:44, GerdP wrote :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi all,
up to now I've used tunnel=culvert
<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel=culvert" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel=culvert</a>
like this:
1) JOSM warns that a waterway and highway are crossing
2) I split the waterway into 3 parts and add
tunnel=yes, layer=-1 to the short one in the middle (or
split the road and add bridge=yes,layer=1)
</pre>
</blockquote>
I keep the stream at layer=-2, I add the culvert in an additional
small way segment on top at layer -1 and both are crossing the road
which is at layer=0.<br>
This keeps the stream at layer=-2 from spring to end, which is
perfectly correct and convenient.<br>
A Nominatim search of a JOSM selection shows the whole stream and
not stupid pieces.<br>
<br>
I never understood the remark "it is not necessary to not split, one
can consolidate splits in relations (easy, isn't it)". To me, it is
"it is not necessary to split". Why not avoid splits in the first
place?<br>
The same can be done for bridges which are in fact pieces of
concrete under the uninterrupted tarmac foil and not an interruption
(split) of the road.<br>
<br>
I once wrote an OVERLAY suggestion (to be discussed, that I much
improved since) that generalizes the principle of an overlay way
segment that, in one of its usages, applies tags such as speed limit
to a segment of the highway. Roads, as seen by an editor, Nominatim
etc., are kept unsplit but the programs that do not want to deal
with the overlay segments can prepare the OSM data by using the
overlay ways to split the main ones, discarding them and continue
with the same logic as presently.<br>
In a second usage, it can avoid a hiking route that is using a main
highway over 50m before leaving it to split that main highway.<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Dave Swarthout<br>Homer, Alaska<br>Chiang Mai, Thailand<br>Travel Blog at <a href="http://dswarthout.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://dswarthout.blogspot.com</a></div></div>
</div>