On 2/12/20 3:54 am, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote:
Dec 1, 2020, 01:17 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: On 1/12/20 12:18 am, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote:Nov 30, 2020, 13:10 by 61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@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.
And the OP wants to tag weight and width limits for the road as it crosses a culvert...
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
