[Tagging] Irrigation: ditches, canals and drains
It looks like our long discussion a while back didn't lead to substantial changed to the wiki pages for waterway=drain, waterway=ditch and waterway=canal. I was checking on how many waterway=ditch were tagged as being used for irrigation, and decided to slightly updated the pages. I've marked all features as "De facto", and slightly adjusted the descriptions and pages to suggest that: - A waterway=drain is lined by concrete or similar materials and is used to remove superfluous water - A waterway=ditch is not lined and is usually used for drainage, but can (controversially) be used for irrigation. I note that the page suggested irrigation=yes, but actually there are 4 options to showing that a ditch or canal is used for irrigation: 1) irrigation=yes was the first tag used, starting it 2011. As of May 2019, it has been used 200 times with canals and 2000 times with ditches. Most of these tags were added between 2011 and 2013. 2) service=irrigation was used starting in 2012, and as of May 2019 is used 12,000 times, mainly with canals but also with several hundred ditches 3) usage=irrigation was introduced in 2018 and usage is increasing quickly. It is currently used 6,000 times. 4) About 2000 hundred canals are tagged canal=irrigation and a few ditches are tagged ditch=irrigation or irrigation=ditch The tagging suggests that waterway=canal is more commonly used for irrigation features, but there certainly is significant usage of waterway=ditch for irrigation: overpass-turbo.eu finds 3605 ways tagged waterway=ditch plus one of the irrigation related tags: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JqW Comparisions: 10687 ways tagged waterway=canal and one of the irrigation tags: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JqX Waterway=drain is specified for irrigation on 1298 ways: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JqY So it looks like a number of mappers consider waterway=ditch appropriate for use with irrigation features, and there is even some use of waterway=drain for irrigation, which surprises me. What, then, should be the distinguishing characteristic between waterway=canal and waterway=ditch or =drain? Width or importance or navigability, or should we still mention the usage as the main difference? - Joseph E ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Difference between barrier=embankment and man_made=embankment?
On github, Christoph mentioned that some of these features tagged barrier=embankment may be types of earthen fortifications, as found in Europe, eg earthen ramparts, earthworks or earth banks. > "Double/symmetric embankment not connected to some other primary feature like > a road... something we in German call a 'Wall' " It could be translated "rampart" - "a large wall built round a town, castle, etc. to protect it"? Or "earthwork": "a raised area of earth made, especially in the past, for defence against enemy attack" This is in use 200 times as barrier=earthworks (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=earthworks) or historic=earthworks - 196 times (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/historic=earthworks) or perhaps barrier=earth_bank - 184 times (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=earth_bank) There are a few uses of barrier=rampart and military=rampart. Perhaps someone could check on the German language mailing list or forum? On 5/28/19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Mateusz Konieczny has marked barrier=embankment as deprecated, and I'm > adding the "deprecated features" template to the wiki page (which I > just made last month, for documentation). Most features were imported > before 2011. > > In contrast, man_made=embankment is well-documented and established, > with increasing usage: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Embankment-man_made-vs-barrier.png > (Graph from http://taghistory.raifer.tech) > > Please comment if you disagree with deprecating barrier=embankment or > have any concerns > > On 4/12/19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> The tag barrier=embankment was not part of the original barriers >> proposal and does not have a wiki page, but it is used 4750 times: >> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=embankment >> >> However, man_made=embankment is well-documented and used over 80,000 >> times: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=embankment >> >> There is also a tag "embankment=yes" that can be applied to linear >> features like roads, similar to "cutting=yes". >> >> And there is barrier=retaining_wall which is documented: >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=retaining_wall >> >> How is this tag being used? Are there any situations where >> barrier=embankment is better or at least clearly different than >> man_made=embankment? >> >> (Note that this tag is currently rendered by the Openstreetmap-Carto >> style like a retaining wall or fence, while man_made=embankment has a >> specific rendering, but this could change) >> > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Meaning of tunnel=flooded vs tunnel=yes for waterways?
The proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Hydropower_water_supplies introduced the tags waterway=pressurized for non-pipeline waterways that are completely filled with water. It also introduced tunnel=flooded for waterways and pipelines, and the wiki page has this description: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel%3Dflooded "A flooded tunnel is an artificial structure intended to channel water on a significant distance. Its dimensions and length allow human to fit inside but safe walking is impossible due to high amount of water or other fluid expected in operation. Such tunnels are different from tunnel=culvert where human usually can't enter and for which dimensions are restricted to building or way it is supposed to go underpass. They are also different from man_made=pipeline since a pipeline is built from tubes assemblies." I'm a little confused about how to decide when to use tunnel=flooded vs tunnel=yes with waterway=canal or other free-surface-flow waterways. Is this tag meant to replace all instances of tunnel=yes for large waterways, or are there situations when tunnel=yes with waterway=canal would still be needed? -Joseph Eisenberg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Telephone poles and lines?
Le mar. 28 mai 2019 à 09:32, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > > I would be in favour of man_made=utility_pole or any other domain > agnostic tag > But as the refinement of power=pole/tower was denied a few years ago, I > guess telecom=pole will be used consistently > > > Would you recommend that we use man_made=utility_pole for poles that carry > telecom cables or other services? > I would be in favour of man_made=utility_pole, only if it can catch ALL utilities: power, telecom, cable tv... But since it was rejected to refine power=pole as man_made=utility_pole (or equivalent), then telecom=pole should be used to be consistent with what currently exists. > When should we use telecom=pole? > To me (and I may be wrong), the simplest rule would be to look what is the highest on the pole If it's telecom cables, then use telecom=pole It's not perfect, but I don't see any better rule, not to mention man_made=utilitiy_pole François ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:golf=cartpath - correction
Image added to commons, and inserted into that page. On 5/27/19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > That sound like a great use case for golf_cart=yes (or is it > golf_cart=designated?)! If you can take a photo of this location, it > would be very helpful to add it to the page for Key:golf_cart > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:golf_cart) > > On 5/28/19, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: >> Golf carts are also allowed on local highway=service under certain >> circumstances. A local service road (in front of Walmart, which has been >> there for 20 years) recently got a golf cart icon diamond shaped sign >> added. The newly arrived golf cart traffic is from a caravan park that >> recently opened just behind WalMart. >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 6:59 PM Joseph Eisenberg >> >> wrote: >> >>> > is there highway=* with golf_cart=designated but outside >>> a leisure=golf_course ? >>> >>> Yes. As mentioned above, some towns in the southeast and southwest USA >>> have networks of paved paths that are intended for golf carts. Sometimes >>> these are “retirement communities” designed around golf courses. Often >>> the >>> paths allow bicycles and walking, but were designed for golf carts. >>> >>> Note that there is also a tag “golf=path” for footways in golf courses. >>> ___ >>> 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 mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Difference between barrier=embankment and man_made=embankment?
Mateusz Konieczny has marked barrier=embankment as deprecated, and I'm adding the "deprecated features" template to the wiki page (which I just made last month, for documentation). Most features were imported before 2011. In contrast, man_made=embankment is well-documented and established, with increasing usage: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Embankment-man_made-vs-barrier.png (Graph from http://taghistory.raifer.tech) Please comment if you disagree with deprecating barrier=embankment or have any concerns On 4/12/19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > The tag barrier=embankment was not part of the original barriers > proposal and does not have a wiki page, but it is used 4750 times: > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=embankment > > However, man_made=embankment is well-documented and used over 80,000 > times: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=embankment > > There is also a tag "embankment=yes" that can be applied to linear > features like roads, similar to "cutting=yes". > > And there is barrier=retaining_wall which is documented: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=retaining_wall > > How is this tag being used? Are there any situations where > barrier=embankment is better or at least clearly different than > man_made=embankment? > > (Note that this tag is currently rendered by the Openstreetmap-Carto > style like a retaining wall or fence, while man_made=embankment has a > specific rendering, but this could change) > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Telephone poles and lines?
> I would be in favour of man_made=utility_pole or any other domain agnostic tag But as the refinement of power=pole/tower was denied a few years ago, I guess telecom=pole will be used consistently Sorru, Idon’t understand this. Would you recommend that we use man_made=utility_pole for poles that carry telecom cables or other services? When should we use telecom=pole? Joseph ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description
Hi tagging, hi Warin, Sorry to interrupt, but I disagree at this point. * * * TL;DR: changing_table: "A tag for tagging changing tables" was indeed bad. changing_table: "provides a surface for changing the nappy (diaper) of an infant or young child" is just right (explains that "table" can be a "generic surface", that "changing" refers to "changing babies". "changing the nappy (diaper)" is well-suited in a description, no need to define what "change a diaper" means * * * We should aim for '*self-explanatory* *description*', the gold standard being duck tagging. We can have a lot of self-referencing, which means the key-value is well suited to describe the object, with a short and clear text as much as possible. On the other side I think we should avoid long, complicated sentences, or escaping terms (circumlocution) a few examples: amenity = hospital: A hospital providing in-patient medical treatment amenity = school: A primary or secondary school (pupils typically aged 6 to 18) wikipedia = *: Provides a link to Wikipedia's article about the feature religion = *: Defines the specific religion I completely disagree we should have '*definition*' and avoid '*self-referencing*'. OSM wiki is a documentation with *description* and use of tags, but it is not a dictionary for *definition* of terms. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
