Hi Andrew,
It seems to me there are a few issues here. Culverts are already in OSM so its relatively easy to extract them and use them in conjunction with other spatial software. If they are well located spatially then they will intersect the road. There is no real need for them to have an ‘attachment’ to the road. There are also no doubt cases where there are culverts with no attachment to a creek or river (ie crossing into a property over a ‘drain’) The second is how they are rendered. The beauty of OSM is that should someone want to make a specific map, app or routing software based on OSM, say for heavy vehicles, then they are free to render the culverts in many ways depending on the attributes that are attached to them. Indeed, I would love to see an “Emergency Services” render of OSM features that is great for firefighters/Ambulance etc that specifically highlights fire trails, water sources, hydrants, hospitals, ‘places of last resort’ etc. http://openfiremap.org/ - zoom in to see hydrants/stations etc Thirdly, is how they can be ‘matched’ to other systems. The ‘ref‘ key is often used for this (metro/transport stops etc) so that may go partway to a solution for you. Others can probably comment more on how that has been achieved in the past. You may also consider if other attributes would be good to add to the tunnel=culvert tags. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4903105785/history Hope this helps you in getting more useful data into OSM. Cheers - Phil From: Andrew Hughes <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 30 November 2020 1:25 PM To: [email protected] Cc: OpenStreetMap <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads Hi All, Thanks everyone for your feedback. We would like the culvert to be an 'isolated' segment of road for a number of reasons. General (light vehicle) limits are typically signed however anything that is 'really heavy' such as a mobile crane, concrete pump or heavy freight are assessed individually. So for us, it's important that the culvert is identifiable so that it's not just 'somewhere' on the road because it's not signposted - possibly mixed along segments with other culverts. This is exactly the same as why a waterway would be isolated and tagged with the culvert also - so that its location can be established. Additionally, culverts can be quite wide (depending on the water body) so a point/node is not an accurate representation - they should be ways. This will also allow spatial relationships to be used with far greater accuracy & application. Please consider how important the location is for the driver/operator, and that the culvert is not just somewhere along a (long) length of road. Another reason is most bridges and culverts have formal structure/identification numbers. We would like to see OpenStreetMap cater for both spatial and a-spatial relationships to external systems - typically those in local and state government. Many of these 'external' systems do not have a spatial component and would compliment each other nicely. We also feel that mapping these out in OpenStreetMap in this way would greatly assist in the event of natural disaster. The royal commission into bushfires last summer discussed the issue of data either not existing, being inaccessible or not within in a national context. Placing this data into OpenStreetMap would be a great way to show what is possible. I hope this helps explain just a few reasons why we would like to see culverts mapped this way. Is there a reason why it is a bad idea to map Culverts this way? Kind regards, --Andrew On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 12:12, cleary <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Thanks for that info. On Sat, 28 Nov 2020, at 11:15 AM, Mark Pulley wrote: > There is flood_prone=yes that can be used for these roads - but only > where signposted. > > Mark P. > > > On 27 Nov 2020, at 8:19 pm, cleary <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > In regard to sections of road that are subject to flooding, I think that is > > a separate issue. Sometimes lengths of road may be signposted as floodways > > and I am not aware if there is any appropriate OSM tagging for that. If so, > > it should be only where signposted and we should not assume that every > > place where a road crosses a stream is necessarily subject to flooding. > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
