Small culverts/bridges in bushland

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Small culverts/bridges in bushland

Ian Steer


>
> Hi,
>
> Lately a mapper has been adding heaps of fords in SE QLD bushland along
> with more creeks/streams, however I've noticed quite a lot of the fords
> aren't actually fords based on my local knowledge of the area. I tried
> commenting on a changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58540304)
> 2 weeks ago and again a week ago without a response, they have been active
> in that time and appear to be a long time contributor, but I'm now at a
> loss on how to contact them.
>
> My question isn't about what they've been doing, but about the fact I've
> not wanted to split ways and try to line up a tiny culvert or bridge when
> they are physically so small, however because they haven't been mapped
> someone is now incorrectly added fords. Many of the culverts are just a
> small pipe (sometimes as small as 20mm diameter and 0.5m long) with dirt
> over it to keep the trail dry (the trail is usually built up a little in
> the low lying area), and many of the bridges are only a metre long timber
> bridge especially those added for MTB.
>
> The wiki states that bridge=* and tunnel=* should not be used on nodes, so
> I've not used them and in the past only mapped fords (many which have big
> sized gravel or stepping stones) and obviously use a shared node.
>
> I've read a bunch of discussion on this topic and agree that splitting ways
> to model these is overkill as the tags on each way can get out of sync and
> get in the way, but removing the incorrect fords and not putting something
> in their place irks me. The wiki's comment about a ford: "You are both on
> the highway and in the waterway, and not separated logically as a stream
> under a bridge would be" makes complete sense, and I don't want shared
> nodes for these cases even though many streams are intermittent.
>
> Finally my question, why couldn't we map a culvert as a node of a waterway,
> or a bridge as a node of a highway? The only other option I can think of is
> to add a note to a node of highway/waterway describing what is there so
> someone doesn't add a ford.
>
> Thanks, Jono
>
I have been “guilty” of adding small fords and culverts on bush tracks because JOSM gives me an error message if you have a waterway crossing a way without some sort of bridge, Ford, etc - and I try to avoid doing edits and leaving errors/warnings.

Ian

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Small culverts/bridges in bushland

Warin
On 24/05/18 08:32, Ian Steer wrote:

>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Lately a mapper has been adding heaps of fords in SE QLD bushland along
>> with more creeks/streams, however I've noticed quite a lot of the fords
>> aren't actually fords based on my local knowledge of the area. I tried
>> commenting on a changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58540304)
>> 2 weeks ago and again a week ago without a response, they have been active
>> in that time and appear to be a long time contributor, but I'm now at a
>> loss on how to contact them.
>>
>> My question isn't about what they've been doing, but about the fact I've
>> not wanted to split ways and try to line up a tiny culvert or bridge when
>> they are physically so small, however because they haven't been mapped
>> someone is now incorrectly added fords. Many of the culverts are just a
>> small pipe (sometimes as small as 20mm diameter and 0.5m long) with dirt
>> over it to keep the trail dry (the trail is usually built up a little in
>> the low lying area), and many of the bridges are only a metre long timber
>> bridge especially those added for MTB.
>>
>> The wiki states that bridge=* and tunnel=* should not be used on nodes, so
>> I've not used them and in the past only mapped fords (many which have big
>> sized gravel or stepping stones) and obviously use a shared node.
>>
>> I've read a bunch of discussion on this topic and agree that splitting ways
>> to model these is overkill as the tags on each way can get out of sync and
>> get in the way, but removing the incorrect fords and not putting something
>> in their place irks me. The wiki's comment about a ford: "You are both on
>> the highway and in the waterway, and not separated logically as a stream
>> under a bridge would be" makes complete sense, and I don't want shared
>> nodes for these cases even though many streams are intermittent.
>>
>> Finally my question, why couldn't we map a culvert as a node of a waterway,
>> or a bridge as a node of a highway? The only other option I can think of is
>> to add a note to a node of highway/waterway describing what is there so
>> someone doesn't add a ford.
>>
>> Thanks, Jono
>>
> I have been “guilty” of adding small fords and culverts on bush tracks because JOSM gives me an error message if you have a waterway crossing a way without some sort of bridge, Ford, etc - and I try to avoid doing edits and leaving errors/warnings.
>

If the fords and culverts are real then there is no problem.

But adding things that are not there just to remove some error/warning is not good. They should be left as errors//warnings.

Only when the crossing can be resolved into a ford or culvert should that feature be added.
Otherwise an addition to solve an error/warning might be made that is wrong ... there could be a bridge!


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Small culverts/bridges in bushland

Ian Steer
In reply to this post by Ian Steer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> I have been “guilty” of adding small fords and culverts on bush tracks because JOSM gives me an error message if you have a waterway crossing a way without some sort of bridge, Ford, etc - and I try to avoid doing edits and leaving errors/warnings.
>

>If the fords and culverts are real then there is no problem.

>But adding things that are not there just to remove some error/warning is not good. They should be left as >errors//warnings.

>Only when the crossing can be resolved into a ford or culvert should that feature be added.
>Otherwise an addition to solve an error/warning might be made that is wrong ... there could be a bridge!


I have only ever mapped what is on the ground.  There's always some way for a path the cross a stream - ford, culvert, bridge etc.  It just seems a bit trivial when you have a path crossing a mapped stream that is so small you can jump across it.

Ian

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 21:35:42 +1000
From: Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]>
To: OSM Australian Talk List <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Queensland Govt Spatial Catalogue
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Surfacing an old thread here as there have been recent developments.

The "Protected areas of Queensland - boundaries" dataset from QSpatial[1] has been previously imported by QldProtectedAreas[2]. It's CC BY 3.0 AU licensed, but the data custodian (Department of Environment and Science) has completed the OSMF CC BY waiver[3] clearing the data for use in OSM from a licensing perspective. The data custodian only agreed to complete the waiver for that specific dataset due to concerns about the data quality of other datasets.

As far as I'm aware we haven't been able to get the waiver completed by other departments who publish their data on QSpatial and we have no QSpatial blanket waiver, only this specific dataset.

Is anyone interested in updating OSM based on some of the new data from this dataset? A quick scan in QGIS there are some differences (mostly due to new data published on QSpatial) but mostly it's consistent.

To compare the two I,

1. Downloaded queensland.osm.pdf extract from http://download.openstreetmap.fr/extracts/oceania/australia/
2. Extracted protected areas from that file with:
osmium tags-filter --overwrite -o qld-protected-areas.osm.pbf queensland.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=protected_area,national_park,state_forest

Giving https://tianjara.net/data/QLD_Protected_Areas.geojson from QSpatial and https://tianjara.net/data/qld-protected-areas.geojson from OSM which can be compared in QGIS or JOSM using the GeoJSON plugin.

[1] http://qldspatial.information.qld.gov.au/catalogue/custom/index.page
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/QldProtectedAreas
[3]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:QPWS_ProtectedAreas_CC-BY3.0_OSM_PermissionSigned.pdf

On 26 January 2016 at 21:35, Nev Wedding <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi
> I have been browsing the Queensland Spatial Catalogue and noticed the
> following
>
> Protected areas of Queensland - boundaries              Published date -
> 11 Jun 2015
> http://qldspatial.information.qld.gov.au/catalogue/custom/
> search.page?q=%22Protected%20areas%20of%20Queensland%20-%20boundaries%
> 22
>
> Nature refuges and coordinated conservation     Date published -14 Sep 2012
> http://qldspatial.information.qld.gov.au/catalogue/custom/
> search.page?q=%22Nature%20refuges%20and%20coordinated%
> 20conservation%20areas%22
>
> ** Has this been imported and if not do we have permission to use to
> edit/update the OSM
>
>
> Others I noticed that may be useful were Local government area
> boundaries http://qldspatial.information.qld.gov.au/catalogue/custom/
> search.page?q=%22Local%20government%20area%20boundaries%20-%20Queensla
> nd%
> 22
> Locality boundaries
> http://qldspatial.information.qld.gov.au/catalogue/custom/
> search.page?q=%22Locality%20boundaries%20-%20Queensland%22
>
> All are licensed under a Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Australia
> licence.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20180524/574b716e/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


------------------------------

End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 131, Issue 19
****************************************


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au