Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Dave Swarthout]

 >If 2 ways share a node, then they must be connected to each other. ie on
the same layer. So one can't be above/below the other. A road and a stream
crossing on the same layer is a ford.
>If you tag the shared node as a tunnel, then you don't know which way goes
through the tunnel.  Does the stream go through a tunnel, or does the road
go through a tunnel, or both?

>It is much more useful to map tunnels/bridges as a way. If you know there
is a tunnel, but don't know how long the tunnel is, you can estimate it. ie
based on the width of the road. You can add a note to say the exact
>length/position is estimated

Excellent explanation. Agree totally.

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:48 AM, Craig Wallace 
wrote:

> On 2018-02-28 23:21, Vao Matua wrote:
>
>> François
>>
>> I don't have an example.  I was trying to think of an example where layer
>> would be needed for a stream/road crossing.  A pipe would probably be a
>> better example.
>>
>> Sorry to cause a distraction.
>>
>> My real question is "Why not allow tunnel=culvert to be a node?"
>>
>> Emmor
>>
>
> If 2 ways share a node, then they must be connected to each other. ie on
> the same layer. So one can't be above/below the other. A road and a stream
> crossing on the same layer is a ford.
> If you tag the shared node as a tunnel, then you don't know which way goes
> through the tunnel.  Does the stream go through a tunnel, or does the road
> go through a tunnel, or both?
>
> It is much more useful to map tunnels/bridges as a way. If you know there
> is a tunnel, but don't know how long the tunnel is, you can estimate it. ie
> based on the width of the road. You can add a note to say the exact
> length/position is estimated.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Warin]

A culvert goes under the road and only carries the waterway. So it does 
not 'exist' for the road. As such the culvert would be tagged on the 
waterway and not on the roadway. The length of the culvert ... well it 
is at least as wide as the road, if you cannot see it in imagery simply 
make it a bit wider than the roads width. In Australia many streams are 
intermittent - meaning the at water is not frequently there .. that 
makes seeing these culverts difficult - I simply use the road widths if 
I cannot see them.


A ford is where a waterway crosses a road, so needs to be on both 
waterway and roadway. So this tag should take place on both waterway and 
roadway where they share a node (or a way). These too can nbe hard to 
see in Australia, if I cannot make out what it is (ford or culvert) I 
don't tag it .. that leaves an error, but it is not something I can 
identify so I leave it.


A reason whey tagging tunnel=culvert on a nod that has n=both road and 
waterway is that the renders then have to decide it the tunnel is on the 
road or the waterway .. or possibly there are 2 tunnels ... one on the 
road the other on the waterway ... too complex for the renders... the 
mappers have to decide.



On 01-Mar-18 08:31 AM, Vao Matua wrote:
Can someone help me understand two different types of stream and road 
crossings?


A ford can be a node or 
a way (180,749 nodes & 63,842 ways)


However, a culvert 
can only be a 
way (691,972 ways)


In many circumstances from imagery I can see a stream crossing under a 
road without a bridge or ford and therefore I assume that it is a 
culvert, but typically cannot see the ends to split the watercourse.  
Why does a culvert have to be a way rather than a way OR a node?


What I would like to do is simply merge a node of the road and a node 
of the stream and give it the tag tunnel=culvert (when I do this JOSM 
complains)


In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it 
would make sense to create a way and layer=1


Any insights for this apparent inconsistency?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Craig Wallace]

On 2018-02-28 23:21, Vao Matua wrote:

François

I don't have an example.  I was trying to think of an example where 
layer would be needed for a stream/road crossing.  A pipe would 
probably be a better example.


Sorry to cause a distraction.

My real question is "Why not allow tunnel=culvert to be a node?"

Emmor


If 2 ways share a node, then they must be connected to each other. ie on 
the same layer. So one can't be above/below the other. A road and a 
stream crossing on the same layer is a ford.
If you tag the shared node as a tunnel, then you don't know which way 
goes through the tunnel.  Does the stream go through a tunnel, or does 
the road go through a tunnel, or both?


It is much more useful to map tunnels/bridges as a way. If you know 
there is a tunnel, but don't know how long the tunnel is, you can 
estimate it. ie based on the width of the road. You can add a note to 
say the exact length/position is estimated.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[Kevin Kenny]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 5:37 PM, François Lacombe
 wrote:
>> If you're coming to Rome, be sure to visit the "park of aqueducts", or
>> "park of the 7 aqueducts" ;-)
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53791283
>
> I definetly have to come there :)
> NYC city water tunnel #3 in live operation would also be a great thing to
> see as Kevin reminds me its last stage recent completing

There isn't much to see with Tunnel Three - everything's
deep underground and closed to the public.

The hills above the reservoirs, however, offer great hiking opportunities.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14738413825 is the view
from https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/357546546 looking out
over https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6281964 - and
I see I have some repair of broken relations to do when I get
home. :)

And we're getting far from the topic, so I'll be quiet again.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Vao Matua]

 François

I don't have an example.  I was trying to think of an example where layer
would be needed for a stream/road crossing.  A pipe would probably be a
better example.

Sorry to cause a distraction.

My real question is "Why not allow tunnel=culvert to be a node?"

Emmor


2018-02-28 22:31 GMT+01:00 Vao Matua :

> In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it
> would make sense to create a way and layer=1
>

Can you provide examples of such a culvert please?

IMHO this can't be called a culvert since there is pretty no point to cover
the water course if it is over the road.
This maybe a canal (waterway=canal, eventually with bridge=aqueduct on it)
or the road can go through a tunnel like here :
https://photorator.com/photos/images/underwater-road-xpost-
from-rwoahdude-20901.jpg

All the best

François



On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:27 PM, François Lacombe  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 2018-02-28 22:31 GMT+01:00 Vao Matua :
>
>> In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it
>> would make sense to create a way and layer=1
>>
>
> Can you provide examples of such a culvert please?
>
> IMHO this can't be called a culvert since there is pretty no point to
> cover the water course if it is over the road.
> This maybe a canal (waterway=canal, eventually with bridge=aqueduct on it)
> or the road can go through a tunnel like here :
> https://photorator.com/photos/images/underwater-road-xpost-
> from-rwoahdude-20901.jpg
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

2018-02-28 13:04 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
> If you're coming to Rome, be sure to visit the "park of aqueducts", or
> "park of the 7 aqueducts" ;-)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53791283
>

I definetly have to come there :)
NYC city water tunnel #3 in live operation would also be a great thing to
see as Kevin reminds me its last stage recent completing

Mapping encourages tourism which encourages mapping :)

François
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[François Lacombe]

Hi,

2018-02-28 22:31 GMT+01:00 Vao Matua :

> In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it
> would make sense to create a way and layer=1
>

Can you provide examples of such a culvert please?

IMHO this can't be called a culvert since there is pretty no point to cover
the water course if it is over the road.
This maybe a canal (waterway=canal, eventually with bridge=aqueduct on it)
or the road can go through a tunnel like here :
https://photorator.com/photos/images/underwater-road-xpost-from-rwoahdude-20901.jpg

All the best

François
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/02/2018 21:31, Vao Matua wrote:


What I would like to do is simply merge a node of the road and a node 
of the stream and give it the tag tunnel=culvert (when I do this JOSM 
complains)
Because that would then be a ford rather than a culvert - you're 
implying that at a certain point (the joining node) you've got your feet 
on the road and in the stream?




In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it 
would make sense to create a way and layer=1


That sounds (at least in English English) like some sort of bridge 
(aqueduct) rather than a culvert - though this did come up the last time 
that culverts were discussed on this list** - someone found an old 
picture of a car going over a bridge over a culvert and thought that the 
picture's title ("the culvert") referred to the bridge.


If you genuinely don't know how a road crosses a waterway then you can 
of course just have the one crossing the other.  QA sites will flag this 
as an error (which is correct - it is) but if you don't have any 
information about how to correct the error (is there a ford?  bridge? is 
there no bridge but the stream runs in a box culvert?) then to my mind 
there's no problem leaving the "error" there so that someone who has 
more information can correct it.


Best Regards,

Andy

** 
https://duckduckgo.com/html?q=culvert%20site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Fpipermail%2F 
gets some hits.  There were also a bunch of discussions around the time 
that 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simple_one_node_bridge 
was created - so have a look at the lists then.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Culverts and Fords

[Vao Matua]

Can someone help me understand two different types of stream and road
crossings?

A ford can be a node or a way
(180,749 nodes & 63,842 ways)

However, a culvert can
only be a way (691,972 ways)

In many circumstances from imagery I can see a stream crossing under a road
without a bridge or ford and therefore I assume that it is a culvert, but
typically cannot see the ends to split the watercourse.  Why does a culvert
have to be a way rather than a way OR a node?

What I would like to do is simply merge a node of the road and a node of
the stream and give it the tag tunnel=culvert (when I do this JOSM
complains)

In the case where a culvert carries a watercourse over a road then it would
make sense to create a way and layer=1

Any insights for this apparent inconsistency?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Philip Barnes]

Wholesale primarily sells to trade customers, rather than retail. 

Many will refuse to sell to normal retail customers.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 28 February 2018 12:30:38 GMT+00:00, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 wrote:
>2018-02-28 10:48 GMT+01:00 Stefano :
>
>> Where did you read that??
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/wholesale
>>
>
>
>
>the proposal is even clearer:
>"A wholesale dealer sells large stock of items, usually to other shop
>owners and resellers."
>
>Cheers,
>Martin

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-28 10:48 GMT+01:00 Stefano :

> Where did you read that??
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/wholesale
>



the proposal is even clearer:
"A wholesale dealer sells large stock of items, usually to other shop
owners and resellers."

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-28 10:48 GMT+01:00 Stefano :

>
>
> 2018-02-28 10:39 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>> The wiki states that a shop is a place selling retail goods or services.
>> The value shop=wholesale, almost 1000 uses, is not fitting into this
>> definition. What shall we do?
>>
>
> Where did you read that??
> I see on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dwholesale
> A *warehouse club * or *cash
> and carry * is
> a large store which sells items in bulk. Many warehouse clubs require a
> membership fee.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/wholesale
>



for one, by the term "wholesale" used as tag value. Then there is the
wording "selling in bulk" and then there are links to wikipedia (the
significance of this could be disputed and I would be the first to agree).

Reference to the shop definition:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
"Description: A place selling retail products or services."

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-28 11:07 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe :

> I would rephrase it as "ancient parts of Roman aqueducts
> (tunnels/bridges/canals)".
> Given problem is we intend to map landmarks with words referring to way
> other things.
>
> Aqueduct should be a term only used on relations involving different
> physical man made structure like pipeline, tunnels or bridges.
> waterway=aqueduct would woth it on type=waterway relations
>
> This : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Pont_Du_Gard.JPG
> is only *part of* an aqueduct, not the aqueduct itself.
>



yes, it is used for parts of aqueducts (most ancient aqueducts aren't
complete any more), in some cases there might even be 2 aqueducts in the
same piece of relic, e.g. here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_Anio_Novus
The Anio Novus was running the last 13 kilometers on top of the structure
of Acqua Claudia.

If you're coming to Rome, be sure to visit the "park of aqueducts", or
"park of the 7 aqueducts" ;-)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53791283

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OKFILTER] Re: [OKFILTER] Re: "service" tags in general (for shops)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-27 14:42 GMT+01:00 Johnparis :

> Yes, it's certainly in general use. And its page marks "shop=printing" as
> a tagging error.
>
>

I'd remove this. Although not frequent, there are actually shops that do
traditional printing (with vintage look etc.)
e.g. http://www.letterjazz.com/print-studio



The shop=printing discussion page explains why that tag isn't a good idea
> either. Basically the distinction needs to be drawn between wholesale and
> retail (copyshop) printing.
>


shop is retail, it is defined like this. A copyshop is typically about
digital printing, should not be confused with traditional printing. Maybe
the latter is the exception and for clarity, it should be made a specific
tag like shop=traditional_printing or analogue_printing or relief_printing
(if they offer only this process).

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OKFILTER] Re: "service" tags in general (for shops)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-27 14:40 GMT+01:00 Fredrik :

> So _probably_ those shop=printshop (66 uses), craft=printshop ( 10 uses)
> and craft=print_shop (119) should be a shop=copyshop?
>
> And the printer_ink/toner/cartridge refill-shops is something else
> entirely?
>



yes, around here, there are really shops selling only ink and toner
cartridge refills / regenerated cartridges (and maybe paper). You cannot
use any copying machine or printer there.
They might sell printers in some cases.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi Martin,

2018-02-28 10:30 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

> on a side note: there's the tag
>
> historic=aqueduct
>
> for the mentioned ancient Roman aqueducts.
>

I would rephrase it as "ancient parts of Roman aqueducts
(tunnels/bridges/canals)".
Given problem is we intend to map landmarks with words referring to way
other things.

Aqueduct should be a term only used on relations involving different
physical man made structure like pipeline, tunnels or bridges.
waterway=aqueduct would woth it on type=waterway relations

This : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Pont_Du_Gard.JPG
is only *part of* an aqueduct, not the aqueduct itself.

All the best

François
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-27 13:33 GMT+01:00 Paul Allen :

>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:11 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> craft is about a profession, so this is about the workplace of someone
>> who has learnt printing as a profession
>>
>
> There are two possibilities for a printer (as in typographic presses and
> the people who run them).
>
> One possibility is office=printer.  The wiki says that office is a place
> of business where administrative or professional
> work is carried out.  It sells services not goods (some printers may also
> sell stationery supplies or pre-printed items
> but that's a sideline) so it's office rather than shop.
>


actually shop=* is about a (public facing) place selling retail goods or
services. E.g. shop=haircutter, shop=tailor, shop=beauty, shop=massage,
shop=tattoo, shop=car_repair, shop=bookmaker, shop=funeral_directors,
shop=laundry, shop=travel_agency, etc.

I agree that office=printer could also make sense (it's actually used 8
times, there are also 25 office=printing, 8 office=print and 2
office=print_shop).
Offices in OSM generally are places you don't just drop by (compare e.g.
amenity=bank with office=bank), if they are accessible you would normally
need an appointment.




> And office fits a lot better than craft or amenity.
>



craft was introduced because of the existence of relicts from past times
e.g. in Germany concerning the education (and certification) of certain
(regulated, or formerly regulated) professions and arts (e.g by the chamber
of commerce and industry, "chamber of crafts", guilds, etc.). In this
context, craft=* means the person/company offering a service is certified
(and should be qualified, will work according to current standards, etc.)
by an official entity (could be private).

Another possibility is building=industrial.  Most jobbing printers have
> large, noisy machinery.
>


building=industrial is a tag about an industrial building. Not a very good
tag IMHO, I'd like to know more about the structure and would prefer
something like building=production_hall, or building=warehouse over a very
generic "industrial". Still, this is not about anything happening inside
the building. In case of these bigger printing facilities, I'd consider
using man_made=works (we should take care to distinguish those plants that
do print from those that produce printing machinery though).
Those bigger facilities often consist of more than one building, and they
also often have open space for parking and loading.


Both may apply to the same building.  Most jobbing printers have some sort
> of office where they deal with customers
> and a lot of machinery.
>

Please distinguish between "building" and what is happening in the building
(and outside of it on the grounds). Those are orthogonal, will often have
different details (e.g. start_date, name).

Cheers,
Martin

>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Stefano]

2018-02-28 10:39 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

> The wiki states that a shop is a place selling retail goods or services.
> The value shop=wholesale, almost 1000 uses, is not fitting into this
> definition. What shall we do?
>

Where did you read that??
I see on
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dwholesale
A *warehouse club * or *cash
and carry * is
a large store which sells items in bulk. Many warehouse clubs require a
membership fee.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/wholesale


> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

The wiki states that a shop is a place selling retail goods or services.
The value shop=wholesale, almost 1000 uses, is not fitting into this
definition. What shall we do?


Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-02-28 0:41 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe :

> Hi all,
>
> 2018-02-21 17:25 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kenny :
>
>> I think you're right. The Aqua Marcia, Aqua Ano Vetus, Aqua Anio
>> Novus, and Aqua Claudia were all known as 'aqueducts' and were systems
>> that were tens of km, in canals where possible, but mostly in
>> underground conduits. There were pressurized syphons for valley
>> crossings. Only the terminal portions of the aqueducts, as they
>> approached the City, or crossings of deep valleys, were on arcades -
>> but these make the tourist pictures, so people get the incorrect
>> impression that 'aqueduct' is synonymous with 'arcade'.
>>
>
> This sounds to be an enough justification to don't use the aqueduct term,
> thank you Kevin
>


on a side note: there's the tag

historic=aqueduct

for the mentioned ancient Roman aqueducts.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging