[Tagging] Clearer definition of tunnel=flooded: when should it be used instead of tunnel=yes or tunnel=culvert?

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Mon Mar 23 00:29:19 UTC 2020

"To me 'tunnel=flooded' means that is cannot really be used for/by
anything other than the fluid in it due to the very small amount of
space left, if any. "

Yes, that is what I would have guessed, too.

I would have guessed that a canal tunnel which is passable by boats
would be tunnel=yes, whether or not there is a side-path.

(This is the problem with proposals that introduce several new tags
all at once. I would have been better to discuss tunnel=flooded
separately, so that this problem would not have occured.)

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/23/20, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23/3/20 9:08 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2020 at 19:09, François Lacombe
>> <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com <mailto:fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     Hi Volker,
>>     ...
>>     Fully disposed to make any improvement to wiki according to those
>>     points.
>> Thanks, Francois.
>> There is possibly a language bias (error?) in the use of tunnel=flooded.
>> I am not a native speaker, but "flooded" to me means at least "more
>> water than normal", and from this discussion it seems that we are
>> talking about the normal presence of water in these structures.
> Normal? No I don't think so. Some 'tunnels may be designed only to carry
> water and have no real room for anything else.  I am thinking of hydo
> schemes where tunnels are used
> To me 'tunnel=flooded' means that is cannot really be used for/by
> anything other than the fluid in it due to the very small amount of
> space left, if any.
> Humm ... a smaller description? '"tunnel=flooded' ... full or nearly
> full of fluid so that the tunnel cannot be used for anything else' ???
>> Tag use tunnel=flooded: 2 in the UK,
>> >> Many, if not the majority of the UK Inland Waterways canals have no
>> tow-path.
>> > Then tunnel=flooded is more appropriate.
>> No, definitely not. These tunnels are not "flooded" at all, the water
>> level in them is carefully controlled
>> (The original method of powering the boats in these canals were men
>> laying on their back and "walking" with their feet upwards along the
>> tunnel ceiling. The French canals, being constructed later, generally
>> did have tow-paths also in the tunnels see for example the
>> Tunnel_de_Mauvages
>> <https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FTunnel_de_Mauvages&psig=AOvVaw3UK-_RmcKBM_5fKTGMZyjW&ust=1584997257128000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CA0QjhxqFwoTCOijlIn9rugCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAS>.
>> I remember when I was a boy my father showed me the tractors pulling
>> the ships through the old tunnel near Arzwiller in Alsace on the same
>> canal)
>> They are uniformly tagged (correctly) as waterway=canal and tunnel=yes.
>> I mentioned them in the context that tunnel=yes does not imply a
>> tow-path.
>> I had glanced at yourHydropower water supplies proposal, but I think I
>> failed to intervene on three specific points:
>>  1. The first one are the inverted siphons (botte sifone
>>     <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botte_sifone>, pont-siphon
>>     <https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont-siphon>), which are
>>     gravity-pressurised always-water-filled sections of non-navigable
>>     canals. I usually map them as culverts, and i have just started to
>>     add the new tag culvert=inverted_siphon to the first three of them.
>>  2. The second point is that the distinction between water-filled and
>>     part-filled water conducts is problematic: culverts that are
>>     frequently used to conduct free-flowing drains, ditches,
>>     irrigation canals, freshwater canals under roads can be anything
>>     from empry to fully filled (and slightly pressurised) depending on
>>     precipitations.
>>  3. waterway=pressurised cannot be used together with waterway=canal
>>     for the inverted-siphon situation
>> Volker

More information about the Tagging mailing list