[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Hockley Brook: relation

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Interesting problem - in some cases I use tunnel=yes and layer=-1 where it's
a short section and likely to be straight. Where it's a longer underground
section I just tag waterway= stream:underground ( or something similar) so
that the data is there but there's no render. Two reasons - stopping clutter
on the rendered map and also we can't be sure of the route

Relation - too much work for a dubious return - a name tag on each
visible(rendered)section works just as well

Regards

Brian

On 24 October 2011 14:58, Andy Mabbett <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

> I've just added some sections of Hockley Brook:
>
>   http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1808084
>
> as straight lines, tagged as pipes, with level -2, where it disappears
> underground. Is there a better way to tag such things?
>
> I'm working backwards (upstream) from its confluence with the Tame at
> Spaghetti Junction, so if anyone knows its route west of what I've
> done so far, please feel free to chip in.
>
> I've also made a relation for it; the first time I've ever done one,
> so please feel free to make constructive criticism.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb-westmidlands/attachments/20111024/315b5f8d/attachment.html>