Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Warin]

Take your pick. It would depend on where;

some places have long stretches of road that are 'flood prone', tagged 
on the road only?


some places have a short section - a ford. So this would need 2 sections 
of stream - one through the culvert (some around me have more than one 
pipe so micro mapping would have 3 culverts!) and another section of 
stream that intersects the road with ford tagging.



One I just walk past today has a culvert .. that part of the road is 
dry, but the road dips down after that and is flooded right now .. depth 
~ 0.6 metres length 30? metres. Did not pay much attention to the length.



On 23/2/22 20:12, Bob Cameron wrote:


Would you mind elaborating?

With the stream under a road (way) as tunnel and the default culvert;

The road over the top has either a node or way ford
Or
is the road/way flood_prone yes
Or
is the stream culvert section additionally ford yes

Tnx

On 23/2/22 19:08, Warin wrote:


Where these are in NSW the DCS Base Map shows where bridges are present.

Some culverts become fords in flood situations, and floods are quite 
possible with intermittent waterways so tagging as both a culvert and 
food way may be best where this occurs.


Personally I'd leave them alone, other than the obvious bridges they 
may not be resolved by imagery alone. I can see them being important 
on main roads .. so possibly those should be done.


On 23/2/22 13:59, Ewen Hill wrote:

Hi,
  A lot of you may have seen and fixed a node on a road adjacent to 
a stream with a single key of fixme="unknown type of water 
crossing", what I didn't realise until I ran an overpass  query 
 was 
that there were 2377 of these fixme remaining in Australia and they 
were all added by a single organisation.


   A lot of these are clearly fords on dry/intermittent creeks and I 
can't see the reason for not mapping these as fords instead of 
adding the fixme note to limit the amount of editing now required to 
fix these imported fixme notes, most from 2018 and 2019.


Row Labels  Count of @version
1   1649
2   604
3   104
4   12
5   5
6   1
7   1
13  1


As the node is adjacent to the stream, I can't see how to easily 
edit these where it is clear it is a bridge or predominantly a ford 
in an easy process. e,g, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6839769585


Any thoughts?

Ewen




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Bob Cameron]

Would you mind elaborating?

With the stream under a road (way) as tunnel and the default culvert;

The road over the top has either a node or way ford
Or
is the road/way flood_prone yes
Or
is the stream culvert section additionally ford yes

Tnx

On 23/2/22 19:08, Warin wrote:


Where these are in NSW the DCS Base Map shows where bridges are present.

Some culverts become fords in flood situations, and floods are quite 
possible with intermittent waterways so tagging as both a culvert and 
food way may be best where this occurs.


Personally I'd leave them alone, other than the obvious bridges they 
may not be resolved by imagery alone. I can see them being important 
on main roads .. so possibly those should be done.


On 23/2/22 13:59, Ewen Hill wrote:

Hi,
  A lot of you may have seen and fixed a node on a road adjacent to a 
stream with a single key of fixme="unknown type of water crossing", 
what I didn't realise until I ran an overpass  query 
 was 
that there were 2377 of these fixme remaining in Australia and they 
were all added by a single organisation.


   A lot of these are clearly fords on dry/intermittent creeks and I 
can't see the reason for not mapping these as fords instead of adding 
the fixme note to limit the amount of editing now required to fix 
these imported fixme notes, most from 2018 and 2019.


Row Labels  Count of @version
1   1649
2   604
3   104
4   12
5   5
6   1
7   1
13  1


As the node is adjacent to the stream, I can't see how to easily edit 
these where it is clear it is a bridge or predominantly a ford in an 
easy process. e,g, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6839769585


Any thoughts?

Ewen




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Andrew Harvey]

What would you like them to do? A fixme tag is very low impact, though I
agree at a certain point adding fixmes en masse is not helpful when you
could already assume from the data that it's incomplete.

There was a suggestion to add this to StreetComplete
https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3749 but
unfortuantly it's not available yet.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 19:31, Ewen Hill  wrote:

> Graeme,
>I'm with you for sending it back to them Graeme. I'm trying to clean up
> the Mawson and the Heyson trails where there are clearly no culverts and
> you wouldn't expect a culvert at all. Warin is correct that there can be a
> small pipe or two under the road in some instances to allow limited flow
> under the road but when it rains, it is designed primarily as a ford. You
> would only see this on key roads and not the tracks that most of these are
> on.
>
>I'm hoping that there can be better due diligence when uploading
> significant changes by adding a small set and requesting feedback.
>
> Ewen
>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 14:11, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 13:02, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>>>
>>
>> Giving it back to "the Organisation" responsible, telling them that's not
>> acceptable & asking them to fix it?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>
> --
> Warm Regards
>
> Ewen Hill
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Ewen Hill]

Graeme,
   I'm with you for sending it back to them Graeme. I'm trying to clean up
the Mawson and the Heyson trails where there are clearly no culverts and
you wouldn't expect a culvert at all. Warin is correct that there can be a
small pipe or two under the road in some instances to allow limited flow
under the road but when it rains, it is designed primarily as a ford. You
would only see this on key roads and not the tracks that most of these are
on.

   I'm hoping that there can be better due diligence when uploading
significant changes by adding a small set and requesting feedback.

Ewen

On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 14:11, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 13:02, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>
> Giving it back to "the Organisation" responsible, telling them that's not
> acceptable & asking them to fix it?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>

-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Warin]

Where these are in NSW the DCS Base Map shows where bridges are present.

Some culverts become fords in flood situations, and floods are quite 
possible with intermittent waterways so tagging as both a culvert and 
food way may be best where this occurs.


Personally I'd leave them alone, other than the obvious bridges they may 
not be resolved by imagery alone. I can see them being important on main 
roads .. so possibly those should be done.


On 23/2/22 13:59, Ewen Hill wrote:

Hi,
  A lot of you may have seen and fixed a node on a road adjacent to a 
stream with a single key of fixme="unknown type of water crossing", 
what I didn't realise until I ran an overpass  query 
 was 
that there were 2377 of these fixme remaining in Australia and they 
were all added by a single organisation.


   A lot of these are clearly fords on dry/intermittent creeks and I 
can't see the reason for not mapping these as fords instead of adding 
the fixme note to limit the amount of editing now required to fix 
these imported fixme notes, most from 2018 and 2019.


Row Labels  Count of @version
1   1649
2   604
3   104
4   12
5   5
6   1
7   1
13  1


As the node is adjacent to the stream, I can't see how to easily edit 
these where it is clear it is a bridge or predominantly a ford in an 
easy process. e,g, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6839769585


Any thoughts?

Ewen

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 13:02, Ewen Hill  wrote:

>
> Any thoughts?
>

Giving it back to "the Organisation" responsible, telling them that's not
acceptable & asking them to fix it?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[osm.talk-au]

I very much doubt anyone actually looked at these when the fixmes were added 
and it was an automated edit that just looked for highway/water crossings 
without tags.

 

From: Ewen Hill  
Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2022 12:59
To: OSM-Au 
Subject: [talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

 

Hi, 

  A lot of you may have seen and fixed a node on a road adjacent to a stream 
with a single key of fixme="unknown type of water crossing", what I didn't 
realise until I ran an overpass 
<https://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=%2F*%0AThis%20is%20an%20example%20Overpass%20query.%0ATry%20it%20out%20by%20pressing%20the%20Run%20button%20above!%0AYou%20can%20find%20more%20examples%20with%20the%20Load%20tool.%0A*%2F%0Anode%0A%20%20%5Bfixme%3D%22unknown%20type%20of%20water%20crossing%22%5D%0A%20%20(%7B%7Bbbox%7D%7D)%3B%0Aout%3B=-36.84446;127.79297;4>
   query was that there were 2377 of these fixme remaining in Australia and 
they were all added by a single organisation.  

 

   A lot of these are clearly fords on dry/intermittent creeks and I can't see 
the reason for not mapping these as fords instead of adding the fixme note to 
limit the amount of editing now required to fix these imported fixme notes, 
most from 2018 and 2019.

 


Row Labels

Count of @version


1

1649


2

604


3

104


4

12


5

5


6

1


7

1


13

1

 

As the node is adjacent to the stream, I can't see how to easily edit these 
where it is clear it is a bridge or predominantly a ford in an easy process. 
e,g, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6839769585 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Ewen

 

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] 2377 occurrences of fixme="unknown type of water crossing"

[Ewen Hill]

Hi,
  A lot of you may have seen and fixed a node on a road adjacent to a
stream with a single key of fixme="unknown type of water crossing", what I
didn't realise until I ran an overpass  query

was
that there were 2377 of these fixme remaining in Australia and they were
all added by a single organisation.

   A lot of these are clearly fords on dry/intermittent creeks and I can't
see the reason for not mapping these as fords instead of adding the fixme
note to limit the amount of editing now required to fix these imported
fixme notes, most from 2018 and 2019.

Row Labels Count of @version
1 1649
2 604
3 104
4 12
5 5
6 1
7 1
13 1

As the node is adjacent to the stream, I can't see how to easily edit these
where it is clear it is a bridge or predominantly a ford in an easy
process. e,g, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6839769585

Any thoughts?

Ewen
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au