[talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Tue Dec 1 16:54:14 UTC 2020




Dec 1, 2020, 01:17 by 61sundowner at gmail.com:

> On 1/12/20 12:18 am, Mateusz Konieczny      via Talk-au wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nov 30, 2020, 13:10 by >> 61sundowner at gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> On 27/11/20 11:15 am, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>> This subject has a long-running chequered past that              hasn't reached a conclusion >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert#.22Tagging_controversy.22_section
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> We need to model/tag the culvert as part of the road              infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Would a node that connects both road and water way be          sufficient? 
>>>
>>>
>> That would break current tagging methods that do not merge in        one node vertically separated
>> objects like culvert pipe under road or river under bridge or        road under road on a viaduct.
>>
>
>
>
>
> OSM uses objects of different levels such as stairs to footways      at a singular shared node. 
>
>
In this case you can transition/move between this features.

>
> Would you have the short length of road tagged with a culvert      indication separate from the waterway culvert indication?
>
>
No, I tag waterway=* + tunnel=culvert and do not tag anything on a road.

And if someone cares about culvert/road crossings they can process OSM data,
there is no need at all to tag it manually for over one million of culverts.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20201201/4b7ea7c6/attachment.htm>


More information about the Talk-au mailing list