Hi Andrew,
One way would be by using a ref key https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref Maybe even something as long as ref:AU:VIC:DOT:SN=2252 or maybe ref:AU:VIC:DOT=SN2252 On the culvert makes sense to me but given you seem to want it related to the way I will let others chime in on whether it could go on a node on the way (similar to the signs we have recently been discussing). Its not something I remember having seen in the past (but I have never looked for any such points) Either way it would be beneficial to at least describe this in the Ozzie roads wiki when its settled, maybe under an infrastructure heading. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads Cheers - Phil From: Andrew Hughes <ahhug...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, 9 February 2023 1:25 PM To: Talk Au <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads Hi All, I am resurrecting this thread after quite a long time of silence. I think it reached an impasse and went down a lot of rabbit holes. But I do need to try my best to get resolution on this. To bring it back to life I will ask the question again, hopefully far more clarity than I once did in 2020. Pretext: For many, culverts are considered to be road infrastructure (they are even owned/managed by Govt. transport departments), while others consider them to be part of the water course. These question(s) below are in the context of those who consider them as road infrastructure. This isn't a question around water courses that tag the culvert because that already has a (good) tagging convention. Context: Given we have more than 50K culvert's And a culvert is considered to be part of the road infrastructure (and/or independently a watercourse) And each culvert has a unique asset/ref identification (example Victorian Dept of Transport, Structure Number == SN2252) Q: How should we create/tag each culvert so that it is (more than just geographically) related to the road (way) including its asset/ref identification? Here's a real world example: The culvert (structure SN2252) as GeoJSON can be seen here... http://geojson.io/#data=data:application/json,%7B%22id%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22Feature%22%2C%22geometry%22%3A%7B%22type%22%3A%22Point%22%2C%22coordinates%22%3A%5B144.291749999897%2C-37.0989999997806%5D%7D%2C%22properties%22%3A%7B%22LAT%22%3A-37.099%2C%22LONGIT%22%3A144.29175%2C%22Archived%22%3A%22N%22%2C%22OBJECTID%22%3A8626%2C%22CD_DIRECTION%22%3Anull%2C%22ID_STRUCTURE%22%3A%22SN2252%22%2C%22Archived_Reason%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22FEATURE_CROSSED%22%3A%22UN-NAMED%20WATERCOURSE%22%2C%22LOCAL_ROAD_NAME%22%3A%222740%20PYRENEES%20HWY%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_1%22%3A%22%20%22%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_2%22%3Anull%2C%22COLLOQUIAL_NAME_3%22%3Anull%7D%7D The location in OSM is... https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=219077864#map=20/-37.09900/144.29175 or the closest node https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=97560366#map=19/-37.09897/144.29190 I will leave it at that for now and let people respond with a fresh slate. Thanks Everyone, Andrew On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 20:13, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au <talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > wrote: Dec 2, 2020, 05:30 by 61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com> : On 2/12/20 3:54 am, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: Dec 1, 2020, 01:17 by 61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto: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... maxweight maxwidth tags on road are well known solution for that _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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
