I don't think that this is a strong point. Thinking about my own edits I'd say that the length could be +/- 4m because typically I just try to place the nodes somewhere neer the road, if I find an existing node that looks good enough I use that. On the other hand, I think we make assumptions about the width of the road based on its type (primary, secondary ,etc), so this assumption would also apply on the culvert.
Gerd ________________________________________ Von: Florian Lohoff <[email protected]> Gesendet: Sonntag, 25. Oktober 2015 11:04 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] tunnel=culvert On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:44:17PM -0700, GerdP wrote: > Hi all, > > up to now I've used tunnel=culvert > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel=culvert > like this: > 1) JOSM warns that a waterway and highway are crossing > 2) I split the waterway into 3 parts and add > tunnel=yes, layer=-1 to the short one in the middle (or > split the road and add bridge=yes,layer=1) > > Now I noticed that the wiki also "allows" to use tunnel=culvert > on a node, but this is rarely used > (taginfo shows 945 tags on nodes and > 305.000 on ways) > I wonder why. The usage of a node seems to be clearer for me, > at least in those cases where the tunnel is almost as broad as the > road. In my eyes it is the same case as with a But our model only marks the CENTER of the road not its extent. So making it a node would mean you have an tunnel= with an extent/length of near 0 ... Flo -- Florian Lohoff [email protected] We need to self-defend - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
