Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Pieren wrote: > t seems that culvert=yes is ambiguous. It can be a ford or applied on the > road. > I'm also in favour to replace culvert=yes by tunnel=culvert, bridge=culvert > or ford=culvert > It has also the advantage of simplifying the tag management in applications > (can just handle tunnel

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Pieren gmail.com> writes: > > It seems that culvert=yes is ambiguous. It can be a ford or applied on the road. I'm also in favour to replace culvert=yes by tunnel=culvert, bridge=culvert or ford=culvertIt has also the advantage of simplifying the tag management in applications (can just handle t

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

2010/8/27 Pieren : > My proposal is to change the wiki to tunnel=culvert (then forget the > bridge/ford). +1, fine for me. Tag it on the waterway-way. If there is a bridge over it, or a ford etc., tag this on the road as usual. > At least, this would make live easier for data consumers which >

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

> > ford=culvert is even more insane. There is either a ford or a culvert. > It's > physically impossible to be both at the same time. > I said "like a ford" in the first place. To me the ford crosses a natural waterway, and the culvert is not a natural waterway. ___

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Cartinus wrote: > > The seventy people who used the tag did not have a problem with > understanding > what they did. > > bridge=culvert is nonsense: A culvert is not a bridge. > > Again, I'm not a native english speaker but It seems that "culvert" is also used to

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Friday 27 August 2010 12:50:39 Pieren wrote: > I'm forwarding the discussion on the next mailing list. > > is that okay if I modify the wiki page and suggest to use > "tunney=culvert" (and "ford=culvert" / "bridge=culvert")  instead of the > ambivalent "culvert=yes" ? It seems it is only ambiva

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:03 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Of course this can also be an advantage and be solved by subtagging. > > I'm forwarding the discussion on the next mailing list. is that okay if I modify the wiki page and suggest to use "tunney=culvert" (and

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

2010/8/26 Pieren : > Question 2 : if not, is it normal that OSM average contributor has to use > these technical words just to make the civil engineers happy ? Don't we take > the risk to exclude more and more average contributors by adopting such > technical vocabular ? There is a good reason th

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

2010/8/27 Nathan Edgars II : > So tunnel=culvert :) I liked the definition given here that a tunnel would be bigger and accessible for humans why a culvert would be smaller and just a kind of tube. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetm

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Liz-11 wrote: > > to complicate matters, a culvert may cut through a road in rural > australia, making a small ford > I'm not sure what you mean by this. A culvert is a (usually) concrete structure, topologically a cylinder, that one way (usually water) goes through and the other goes over. --

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

It seems that culvert=yes is ambiguous. It can be a ford or applied on the road. I'm also in favour to replace culvert=yes by tunnel=culvert, bridge=culvert or ford=culvert It has also the advantage of simplifying the tag management in applications (can just handle tunnel=* or bridge=* or ford=*).

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

> On 27 August 2010 10:04, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> >> The way I understand it, a culvert is just a tiny pseudo-bridge, >> physically >> equivalent to a tunnel under an embankment. Culverts don't show up in >> the US >> National Bridge Inventory, which is a database of bridges on public >> roads

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

+1 On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > >  Question 1 : is "culvert" commonly used by native english speakers ? Is that >  a term mainly used by civil engineers ? > > I understand it to be a passage under a road that isn't big enough for a > vehicle - maybe a 0.5m pipe for water,

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

of an area. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor >From :mailto:carti...@xs4all.nl Date :Thu Aug 26 17:40:42 America/Chicago 2010 On Thursday 26 August 2010 22:45:58 John F. Eldredge wrote: > As far as I know, we aren't trying to make a f

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Question 1 : is "culvert" commonly used by native english speakers ? Is that a term mainly used by civil engineers ? I understand it to be a passage under a road that isn't big enough for a vehicle - maybe a 0.5m pipe for water, or maybe just big enough for some animals, but a human going thr

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:24 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 27 August 2010 10:04, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> >> The way I understand it, a culvert is just a tiny pseudo-bridge, physically >> equivalent to a tunnel under an embankment. Culverts don't show up in the US >> National Bridge Inventory, whi

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On 27 August 2010 10:04, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > The way I understand it, a culvert is just a tiny pseudo-bridge, physically > equivalent to a tunnel under an embankment. Culverts don't show up in the US > National Bridge Inventory, which is a database of bridges on public roads. > They normal

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

The way I understand it, a culvert is just a tiny pseudo-bridge, physically equivalent to a tunnel under an embankment. Culverts don't show up in the US National Bridge Inventory, which is a database of bridges on public roads. They normally carry water under roads, but may also carry a private fa

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Thursday 26 August 2010 22:45:58 John F. Eldredge wrote: > As far as I know, we aren't trying to make a full topographical map Really? -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Thursday 26 August 2010 22:30:11 Pieren wrote: > Not bad for a hidden tag. The question is to know how many are on the > waterway and not on the road and how many different contributors used it. 70 different authors worldwide. There were 4 places worldwide where culvert=yes was used on the sam

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On 26/08/2010 19:29, John F. Eldredge wrote: The term "culvert" is also standard usage in American English. "Tunnel" is generally used to mean an underground passageway large enough for a person to walk through, if not larger. As has already been said, it's also widespread in British Englis

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

x27;t trying to make a full topographical map, so culverts are likely to be mapped as landmarks for someone using the road or path. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor >From :mailto:pier...@gmail.com Date :Thu Aug 26 15:30:11 America/Chicago 2

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Cartinus wrote: > Sometime last year on talk or tagging there was discussion about culverts. > IIRC you opposed special tagging for them then too. > I opposed because I though that it was a technical term only known by civil engineers. But go ahead with culvert

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

On Thursday 26 August 2010 19:52:02 Pieren wrote: > Some people decided recently Those some people are the Dutch who are active on the OSM forum. As you might know the Netherlands is a very wet country. So we have many culverts in the country. Not surprisingly the Dutch word for such a water c

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor >From :mailto:paperl...@timmcnamara.co.nz Date :Thu Aug 26 13:42:50 America/Chicago 2010 This is how I understand "culvert", from New Zealand. Although I've rarely heard "sewer tunnel&qu

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

hort distance, such as the width of a roadway.  "Covered" does not indicate >> the size of a passageway, nor does it indicate the intended purpose of the >> passageway. >> >> ---Original Email--- >> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contribu

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

indicate > the size of a passageway, nor does it indicate the intended purpose of the > passageway. > > ---Original Email--- > Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor > From :mailto:rich...@systemed.net > Date :Thu Aug 26 13:10:13 America/Chicago 2010 >

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

s the width of a roadway. "Covered" does not indicate the size of a passageway, nor does it indicate the intended purpose of the passageway. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor >From :mailto:rich...@systemed.net Date :Thu Aug 26 13:10:

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Pieren wrote: > Question 1 : is "culvert" commonly used by native english speakers ? > Is that a term mainly used by civil engineers ? It's in very frequent use among boaters on the British canals, largely because the ruddy things keep collapsing and taking the canal with them. cheers Richard -

Re: [OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Pieren wrote: > Question 1 : is "culvert" commonly used by native english speakers ? > Is that a term mainly used by civil engineers ? It's in very frequent use among boaters on the British canals, largely because the ruddy things keep collapsing and taking the canal with them. cheers Richard -

[OSM-talk] Culvert and average contributor

Some people decided recently and alone to introduce the tag "culvert=yes" on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:waterway http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:culvert Question 1 : is "culvert" commonly used by native english speakers ? Is that a term mainly used by civil engineers ?