<div dir="ltr">Hi All,<div><br></div><div>I am resurrecting this thread after quite a long time of silence. I think it reached an impasse and went down a lot of rabbit holes. But I do need to try my best to get resolution on this.</div><div><br></div><div>To bring it back to life I will ask the question again, hopefully far more clarity than I once did in 2020.</div><div><br></div><div>Pretext: For many, culverts are considered to be road infrastructure (they are even owned/managed by Govt. transport departments), while others consider them to be part of the water course. These question(s) below are in the context of those who consider them as road infrastructure. This isn't a question around water courses that tag the culvert because that already has a (good) tagging convention.</div><div><br></div><div>Context:</div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>Given we have more than 50K culvert's</div><div>And a culvert is considered to be part of the road infrastructure (and/or independently a watercourse)</div><div>And each culvert has a unique asset/ref identification (example Victorian Dept of Transport, Structure Number == SN2252)</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Q: How should we create/tag each culvert so that it is (more than just geographically) related to the road (way) including its asset/ref identification?</div><div><br></div><div>Here's a real world example:</div><div><br></div><div>The culvert (structure SN2252) as GeoJSON can be seen here...</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><a href="http://geojson.io/#data=data:application/json,%7B%22id%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22Feature%22%2C%22geometry%22%3A%7B%22type%22%3A%22Point%22%2C%22coordinates%22%3A%5B144.291749999897%2C-37.0989999997806%5D%7D%2C%22properties%22%3A%7B%22LAT%22%3A-37.099%2C%22LONGIT%22%3A144.29175%2C%22Archived%22%3A%22N%22%2C%22OBJECTID%22%3A8626%2C%22CD_DIRECTION%22%3Anull%2C%22ID_STRUCTURE%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22Archived_Reason%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22FEATURE_CROSSED%22%3A%22UN-NAMED%20WATERCOURSE%22%2C%22LOCAL_ROAD_NAME%22%3A%222740%20PYRENEES%20HWY%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_1%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_2%22%3Anull%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_3%22%3Anull%7D%7D">http://geojson.io/#data=data:application/json,%7B%22id%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22Feature%22%2C%22geometry%22%3A%7B%22type%22%3A%22Point%22%2C%22coordinates%22%3A%5B144.291749999897%2C-37.0989999997806%5D%7D%2C%22properties%22%3A%7B%22LAT%22%3A-37.099%2C%22LONGIT%22%3A144.29175%2C%22Archived%22%3A%22N%22%2C%22OBJECTID%22%3A8626%2C%22CD_DIRECTION%22%3Anull%2C%22ID_STRUCTURE%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22Archived_Reason%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22FEATURE_CROSSED%22%3A%22UN-NAMED%20WATERCOURSE%22%2C%22LOCAL_ROAD_NAME%22%3A%222740%20PYRENEES%20HWY%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_1%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_2%22%3Anull%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_3%22%3Anull%7D%7D</a></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The location in OSM is...</div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=219077864#map=20/-37.09900/144.29175">https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=219077864#map=20/-37.09900/144.29175</a> or the closest node <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=97560366#map=19/-37.09897/144.29190">https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=97560366#map=19/-37.09897/144.29190 </a></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I will leave it at that for now and let people respond with a fresh slate.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks Everyone,</div><div>Andrew </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 20:13, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au <<a href="mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org">talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Dec 2, 2020, 05:30 by <a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>:<br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div>On 2/12/20 3:54 am, Mateusz Konieczny
via Talk-au wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Dec 1, 2020, 01:17 by <a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>:<br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div>On 1/12/20 12:18 am, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au
wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Nov 30, 2020, 13:10 by <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>:<br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div>On 27/11/20 11:15 am, Andrew Hughes wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div>This subject has a long-running chequered past that
hasn't reached a conclusion <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert#.22Tagging_controversy.22_section" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert#.22Tagging_controversy.22_section</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>From my understanding, the convention is to tag the
water course (i.e. river/stream/creek) as
tunnel=culvert. It's great as it models where water
traverses man made structures and I can see it helping
many scenarios. However, it doesn't help with road
usage.<br></div><div><br></div><div>We need to model/tag the culvert as part of the
road infrastructure.<br></div></div></blockquote><p><br></p><p>Would a node that connects both road and water way be
sufficient? <br></p></blockquote><div>That would break current tagging methods that do not
merge in one node vertically separated<br></div><div>objects like culvert pipe under road or river under
bridge or road under road on a viaduct.<br></div></blockquote><p><br></p><p>OSM uses objects of different levels such as stairs to
footways at a singular shared node. <br></p></blockquote><div>In this case you can transition/move between this features.<br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><p>Would you have the short length of road tagged with a culvert
indication separate from the waterway culvert indication?<br></p></blockquote><div>No, I tag waterway=* + tunnel=culvert and do not tag anything
on a road.<br></div><div><br></div><div>And if someone cares about culvert/road crossings they can
process OSM data,<br></div><div>there is no need at all to tag it manually for over one
million of culverts.<br></div></blockquote><p><br></p><p>And the OP wants to tag weight and width limits for the road as
it crosses a culvert...<br></p></blockquote><div>maxweight maxwidth tags on road are well known solution for that<br></div><div><br></div> </div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote></div>