Dave, I'm officially agnostic on that question! I know both "tunnel=culvert" and "culvert=yes" are used much more frequently in OSM than "bridge=culvert"; I think one of them predominates, but I don't know which.
Yours, -- Chris Hoess On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Dave Swarthout <daveswarth...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I have been following this thread for a few days and have one question > although it might be too late to ask it. Do you want to drop the tag > "culvert" in favor of "tunnel" altogether? I see from the discussion that > some people prefer "tunnel=culvert" in the cases where I have used > "culvert=yes" and "layer=-1". > > I have done some mapping in Alaska and there are many, many culverts in > use as drainage ditches, etc., all over the state. To call a culvert, which > is usually a heavy, corrugated, galvanized metal pipe from 1 to 6 feet in > diameter, a tunnel is a bit of a stretch IMO. I can live with the change > but wanted to pass along my thoughts to you. > > Thanks, > > Dave Swarthout > "AlaskaDave" > > > > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Christopher Hoess <caho...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Greetings, >> >> I've just been over the bridge types proposal < >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bridge_types> which >> I brought to the list twice earlier this year. I think the bugs have been >> pretty well ironed out, and further changes would largely be a matter of >> taste, so I bring it to you for voting. >> >> Summary points since the last discussion: >> The "bridge_type" key has been changed to the more appropriate >> "bridge:structure". The installed base of "bridge_type" is relatively small >> (547 objects), so this shouldn't be a big deal. Typology will stay in >> "bridge" for simplicity. >> I decided to keep the "bridge=movable"; "bridge:movable=..." tagging >> scheme. I think the complexity of the movable bridge types, plus the fact >> that the average person may not know how to distinguish them, makes a >> two-tiered hierarchy reasonable here. >> I dropped "culvert", since our accepted practice seems to use that to tag >> a tunnel on the lower way at such crossings. >> >> I know I can't please everyone in every point, but I think your input has >> made this a very sound proposal with plenty of room for future extension. >> Thanks for your consideration. >> >> Yours gratefully, >> >> -- >> Chris Hoess >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > > -- > Dave Swarthout > Homer, Alaska > Chiang Mai, Thailand > Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
