Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Feb 27, 2020, 00:22 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:

> Different tags are used for petroleum wells vs water wells because
> they look totally different and their function for the general map
> user is quite distinct. A water well might just be a covered hole, but
> if it is a bored (drilled) well it will be connected to a manual or
> powered pump.
>

+1 There are some ultra-deep drillings for water, but are functionally
different both from water well and petroleum wells.

Single tag for petroleum wells and water wells seems to me 
an overgeneralizing of presets.

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

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

[Andrew Davidson]

On Thu, 27 Feb. 2020, 08:22 Martin Koppenhoefer, 
wrote:

>
> can you explain with the amended rules what the outcome would be for
>
> 8 votes yes, 0 no, 1 abstention
>

That is 8 unanimous approval votes so it is passed.

8 votes yes, 1 no, 1 abstention


Didn't reach the required quorum of 10 votes for a majority based count so
not passed.

8 yes, 2 no and any number of abstentions would be passed.
8 yes, 3 no would not pass.

Guess that means the proponent needs to think carefully after an 8/2
result.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Sorting waterway relations?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

JOSM doesn't change seem to change the order when it sorts, if the
relation is already listed "backwards" but in an ordered string. It
also won't sort a waterway relation which includes sidestream members,
or gaps.

But if you sort an unsorted waterway and each of the ways can be put
into one line, it does generally put the arrows pointing down (the
upstream way is first, downstream last).

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/27/20, Andrew Davidson  wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2020, 13:48 Joseph Eisenberg, 
> wrote:
>
>> When you make or sort a relation of type=waterway, do you check if the
>> source or mouth of the river is first on the list of ways?
>>
>
> As the ways point in the direction of flow I would have said that source to
> sink was the natural sorting order.
>
> What does JOSM do if you sort the relation members?
>
>>
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Sorting waterway relations?

[Andrew Davidson]

On Thu, 27 Feb 2020, 13:48 Joseph Eisenberg, 
wrote:

> When you make or sort a relation of type=waterway, do you check if the
> source or mouth of the river is first on the list of ways?
>

As the ways point in the direction of flow I would have said that source to
sink was the natural sorting order.

What does JOSM do if you sort the relation members?

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - drinking_water:refill_scheme

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> 1. How do I change the name of the proposal page to better match what was 
> voted ?

That's not necessary. It's fine to keep the proposal name as it is.

> 2. How do I create the permanent feature page ?

Login to the wiki, then go to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinking_water:refill and
click "create this page".

Or you can use this direct link:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:drinking_water:refill=edit

> should I create a second one for "drinking_water:refill:network"

You can include it on the main tag page if that is easier.

But if you have time it is fine to make a specific page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:drinking_water:refill:network=edit

To make the page, try copying the source text from a similar property
page, and pasting it,

For example copy the text from:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:drinking_water=edit

Then edit it to match your new proposal.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/26/20, European Water Project  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since no one has manifested an objection (still not too late), I am going
> to amend the final voted tag pair to :
>
> drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
> drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;
>
> Can someone please guide me on the below.  I appreciate your advice.  I
> would like to complete all tasks associated with this tag implementation.
>
> 1. How do I change the name of the proposal page to better match what was
> voted ?... The page name corresponds to the one of the first interactions.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Free_Water
>
> 2. How do I create the permanent feature page ? (should I create a second
> one for "drinking_water:refill:network" or include it on the primary page
> ?)
>
> 3.  I will need guidance on the next three steps as well, but this can come
> after completion of 1 + 2.
> - Add a link back to the proposal by using the *statuslink* parameter of
> the feature template.
> - Add a link to the permanent feature page in the proposal page using
> Template:Approved
> feature link
> .
> - Archive the proposal using Template:Archived proposal
> .
>
> Best regards,
>
> Stuart
>
>
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 15:29, European Water Project <
> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> As per yesterday's note, I would like to make the following tweek to the
>> tag pair as per the suggestion from Kovposch for the final write-up.
>>
>> drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
>> drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;
>>
>>
>> instead of :
>>
>> drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
>> drinking_water:refill_scheme=scheme-name1;scheme-name2;scheme-name3;
>>
>> Does anyone believe another round of voting is necessary for this small
>> change ?  I don't mind.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 09:33, European Water Project <
>> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Again,
>>>
>>> In addition to the previous email regarding voting outcome, I think it
>>> is
>>> worth discussing the suggestion of  Kovposch to make refill a namespace
>>> and
>>> use the word network.
>>>
>>> This would change the second tag of the tag pair to
>>> drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have an opinion on this? I personally prefer this namespace
>>> convention because of I find it more generic and I find the word
>>> "network"
>>> clearer than "scheme".
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 09:27, European Water Project <
>>> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Dear All,

 The proposal for tagging bars, restaurants, cafés, kiosks, which refill
 water bottles for free as part of a refill scheme or as an independent
 passes with 13 positive votes and three abstentions.  Please note, that
 to
 be tagged drinking_water:refill = yes, it is imperative that a sign is
 evident so that the tag is verifiable.

 The tag that has been voted positively takes into account the clear
 preference for delimiting individual scheme names with semicolons -
 which
 is common with other tags.


- drinking_water:refill

 
=yes

 
/drinking_water:refill

 
=no

 
- drinking_water:refill_scheme

 

[Tagging] Sorting waterway relations?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

When you make or sort a relation of type=waterway, do you check if the
source or mouth of the river is first on the list of ways?

Another user just suggested that the spring/source of the waterway
should start the list, then the mouth of the river at the ocean (or
where it empties into a larger waterway) should be last. This practice
has not been followed in the areas where I have mapped.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:waterway#Sort_order.3F

Is this done in your area?

- Joseph Eisenberg

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> Christmas trees are intended to regulate the well pressure or manage filling 
> product injection to raise field pressure.
> You'll find them independently on oil or water wells depending on the 
> pressure.

Very few water wells have high enough pressure to require such a
device. 99.9% of water wells are a few meters to a few tens of meters
deep, and most of those that are mapped in Openstreetmap are in
low-income countries where they will have a manual pump on top, or a
bucket that goes into a hand-dug well.

Tags in Openstreetmap are designed by ordinary people for mapping the
usual situation. They do not need to cover the 0.1% of cases that are
strange exceptions or outliers.

But it's perfectly fine to create a new special tag if you want to map
a 1000 meter deep, high-pressure artesian well, and think it necessary
to specify more details. There is no need to deprecate common, easy to
use tags like man_made=water_well.

"The same applies on geothermal wells with substance=steam or
substance=water + utility=heating
https://www.slb.com/drilling/rigs-and-equipment/wellhead-systems/geothermal-wellhead-system;

I agree, and I would not use man_made=water_well for a geothermal
energy facility. Usually these are complex loops where water is
removed but then re-injected. They are not similar to a normal water
well, where groundwater is extracted for drinking or irrigation or
other direct human uses.

There are very few geothermal energy production facilities, compared
to the number of petroleum and water wells in the world, and I don't
think many mappers are trying to map the details of geothermal energy
sites, so power=plant + plant:source=geothermal is enough for most
cases, plus power=generator + generator:source=geothermal, but feel
free to create a new tag for the special details of water circulation
in geothermal plants if you are interested.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/27/20, François Lacombe  wrote:
> Hi
>
> Le jeu. 27 févr. 2020 à 00:23, Joseph Eisenberg
> 
> a écrit :
>
>> Different tags are used for petroleum wells vs water wells because
>> they look totally different and their function for the general map
>> user is quite distinct. A water well might just be a covered hole, but
>> if it is a bored (drilled) well it will be connected to a manual or
>> powered pump.
>>
>
> I respectably disagree Jospeh,
>
> As mentioned, many countries actually drill ground to look for water
> hundred meters down.
> Water is collected like oil here and the well just look the same as
> petroleum.
>
> https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/the-great-man-made-river/
> "The first, 15 years ago, was a mandate to drill and construct 117 water
> wells, 36 piezometer wells and 23 exploratory wells in the Tazerbo area in
> east-central Libya. Some of the wells had to be drilled to a depth of 1,200
> metres, the length of 11 regulation football fields"
>
> I think it's a bad idea to include the substance or purpose in the well
> value as same facilities may be built to collect petroleum or water.
>
>
>> An oil or gas well has a fire-hydrant like structure on top called a
>> "Christmas tree" or a pumping rig like a "pump jack" - you will not
>> mistake them for a water well.
>>
>
> Christmas trees are intended to regulate the well pressure or manage
> filling product injection to raise field pressure.
> You'll find them independently on oil or water wells depending on the
> pressure.
>
> The same applies on geothermal wells with substance=steam or
> substance=water + utility=heating
> https://www.slb.com/drilling/rigs-and-equipment/wellhead-systems/geothermal-wellhead-system
>
> However I'm ok to say that a traditional water well (as any surface well)
> don't look the same as industrial drilled wells.
> So two or more value of man_made may be useful to reflect those difference
> but please don't include any substance indication in man_made values.
>
> All the best
>
> François
>

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[François Lacombe]

Hi

Le jeu. 27 févr. 2020 à 00:23, Joseph Eisenberg 
a écrit :

> Different tags are used for petroleum wells vs water wells because
> they look totally different and their function for the general map
> user is quite distinct. A water well might just be a covered hole, but
> if it is a bored (drilled) well it will be connected to a manual or
> powered pump.
>

I respectably disagree Jospeh,

As mentioned, many countries actually drill ground to look for water
hundred meters down.
Water is collected like oil here and the well just look the same as
petroleum.

https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/the-great-man-made-river/
"The first, 15 years ago, was a mandate to drill and construct 117 water
wells, 36 piezometer wells and 23 exploratory wells in the Tazerbo area in
east-central Libya. Some of the wells had to be drilled to a depth of 1,200
metres, the length of 11 regulation football fields"

I think it's a bad idea to include the substance or purpose in the well
value as same facilities may be built to collect petroleum or water.


> An oil or gas well has a fire-hydrant like structure on top called a
> "Christmas tree" or a pumping rig like a "pump jack" - you will not
> mistake them for a water well.
>

Christmas trees are intended to regulate the well pressure or manage
filling product injection to raise field pressure.
You'll find them independently on oil or water wells depending on the
pressure.

The same applies on geothermal wells with substance=steam or
substance=water + utility=heating
https://www.slb.com/drilling/rigs-and-equipment/wellhead-systems/geothermal-wellhead-system

However I'm ok to say that a traditional water well (as any surface well)
don't look the same as industrial drilled wells.
So two or more value of man_made may be useful to reflect those difference
but please don't include any substance indication in man_made values.

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Different tags are used for petroleum wells vs water wells because
they look totally different and their function for the general map
user is quite distinct. A water well might just be a covered hole, but
if it is a bored (drilled) well it will be connected to a manual or
powered pump.

An oil or gas well has a fire-hydrant like structure on top called a
"Christmas tree" or a pumping rig like a "pump jack" - you will not
mistake them for a water well.

According to these sources, the term "petroleum" can include both
natural gas and crude oil:

http://energy4me.org/all-about-energy/what-is-energy/energy-sources/petroleum/

"Oil and natural gas together make petroleum. Petroleum, which is
Latin for rock oil, is a fossil fuel, meaning it was made naturally
from decaying prehistoric plant and animal remains. It is a mixture of
hundreds of different hydrocarbons molecules containing hydrogen and
carbon that exist sometimes as a liquid (crude oil) and sometimes as a
vapor (natural gas)."

https://www.appea.com.au/oil-gas-explained/oil-and-gas/what-is-petroleum/

"Petroleum is a general term for oil and natural gas."

So a man_made=petroleum_well is a natural gas or crude oil well, but
many (most?) petroleum wells produce both oil and gas.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/27/20, François Lacombe  wrote:
> Le mer. 26 févr. 2020 à 22:06, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> a écrit :
>
>>
>> these aren’t independent concepts, a water well works differently than a
>> gas well. The substance (and its intended use, and the intended quantity)
>> define/s the requirements for the well.
>>
>
> We both agree on the sense.
> I meant semantic independence where substance got its own key and man_made
> regards the well only.
>
> Deep dug wells also exists for water (to take it out artesian aquifer for
> instance or see GMMRP in Lybia), then we may need additional value for such
> drilled wells.
>
> man_made=well => "surface" well
> man_made=drilled_well => very profound well
> Both can get substance=* to state what we take out of each.
>
> All the best
>
> François
>

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Jmapb]

On 2/26/2020 4:59 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

It's also possible to have a functioning petroleum well without any notable 
surface-level equipment


So in that case, there would be no "pumping rig", right? There would
just be some pipes and valves the the wellhead, aka a "Christmas
tree": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellhead and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completion_(oil_and_gas_wells)

Do you know if all "pumping rigs" are similar in appearance to a
pumpjack, or are there others that look quite different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpjack - I've seen many of these in
California and Texas.


Christmas tree, yes, exactly! But they're not all quite that elaborate.
Sometimes they look more like fire hydrants. And I guess that goes
against my claim of "no notable surface-level equipment" because lots of
people like to map fire hydrants.

The pumpjacks are what I know -- I'm no expert but it's a safe
assumption that there are other designs out there.

J



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

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Note that "adding no vote may
turn failing vote into a passing vote"
is a separate issue.

26 Feb 2020, 22:21 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 26. Feb 2020, at 09:15, Joseph Eisenberg  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone else want to add their comments or votes there? This seems
>> to be a rough consensus now.
>>
>
>
> can you explain with the amended rules what the outcome would be for 
>
> 8 votes yes, 0 no, 1 abstention 
>
> 8 votes yes, 1 no, 1 abstention
>
> 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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> It's also possible to have a functioning petroleum well without any
notable surface-level equipment

So in that case, there would be no "pumping rig", right? There would
just be some pipes and valves the the wellhead, aka a "Christmas
tree": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellhead and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completion_(oil_and_gas_wells)

Do you know if all "pumping rigs" are similar in appearance to a
pumpjack, or are there others that look quite different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpjack - I've seen many of these in
California and Texas.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/26/20, Jmapb via Tagging  wrote:
> On 2/26/2020 3:54 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> There are some users on the wiki who seem to treat these two tags as
>> near-synonyms
>>
>> man_made=petroleum_well
>> man_made=pumping_rig
>>
>> The later was approved, but the first is much more common.
>>
>> The proposal in 2008 for pumping_rig said
>>
>> "A tag for pumping platforms - gas, oil, etc. The rig may be on ground or
>> water"
>>
>> But petroleum_well says just: "An oil well is a boring in the Earth
>> that is designed to bring petroleum oil or gas to the surface."
>>
>> I believe not all petrolum wells have a pumping rig? Can someone
>> confirm that these tags are different?
>
> Oil wells generally begin with a boring apparatus housed in a vertical
> derrick (drilling tower). Depending on the circumstances, the derrick
> might be dismantled when the well is ready for production.
>
> Once a well is in production, a pumping rig (which I'd call a pumpjack)
> is installed, to pull the crude up and into a pipeline or storage tank.
> It's possible to have multiple pumpjacks for a single well -- they're
> not synonymous.
>
> It's also possible to have a functioning petroleum well without any
> notable surface-level equipment, especially a gas well.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Public refrigerators

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Feb 2020, at 08:56, Markus Peloso  wrote:
> 
> The amenity=give_box tag is specific for sharing and reusing none food items. 
> Please do not use it for food sharing


+1, although these are somehow similar features from a certain point of view, 
they are also significantly different features from another point of view. I am 
in favor of keeping a distinction on the main tag level.

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

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Feb 2020, at 09:15, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> Does anyone else want to add their comments or votes there? This seems
> to be a rough consensus now.


can you explain with the amended rules what the outcome would be for 

8 votes yes, 0 no, 1 abstention 

8 votes yes, 1 no, 1 abstention

Cheers Martin 





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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[François Lacombe]

Le mer. 26 févr. 2020 à 22:06, Martin Koppenhoefer 
a écrit :

>
> these aren’t independent concepts, a water well works differently than a
> gas well. The substance (and its intended use, and the intended quantity)
> define/s the requirements for the well.
>

We both agree on the sense.
I meant semantic independence where substance got its own key and man_made
regards the well only.

Deep dug wells also exists for water (to take it out artesian aquifer for
instance or see GMMRP in Lybia), then we may need additional value for such
drilled wells.

man_made=well => "surface" well
man_made=drilled_well => very profound well
Both can get substance=* to state what we take out of each.

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Feb 2020, at 09:15, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> After 2 weeks, the discussion at Talk:Proposal_process shows 10 people
> in favor of considering an abstention the same as not voting, except
> for the quorum, and 1 opposed:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposal_process#Clarify_whatever_explicit_abstaining_is_the_same_as_no_vote


luckily there weren’t abstentions in this vote. 

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Feb 2020, at 21:32, François Lacombe  wrote:
> 
> Nevertheess, should we take advantage of this discussion to use man_made=well 
> + substance=* only as to prevent usage of values mixing two independant 
> concepts (the well and the substance)?


these aren’t independent concepts, a water well works differently than a gas 
well. The substance (and its intended use, and the intended quantity) define/s 
the requirements for the well.

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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[François Lacombe]

Hi all,

Le mer. 26 févr. 2020 à 20:55, Martin Koppenhoefer 
a écrit :

>
> thank you for bringing this up. I just noticed you have added a
> deprecation note on
>
> man_made=gas_well
>
> and suggest to use man_made=petroleum_well for gas wells.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dgas_well
>
> are we sure the term petroleum well  covers gas wells? (there is usually
> also some gas to deal with when extracting ”stone oil”, but a petroleum
> well which extracts only gas can still be called an “oil well”?)
>

Petroleum wells usually give gas as well (as gas is located upside
petroleum underground)

Nevertheess, should we take advantage of this discussion to use
man_made=well + substance=* only as to prevent usage of values mixing two
independant concepts (the well and the substance)?

Cheers

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

[Tagging] man_made=gas_well Was man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Feb 2020, at 09:56, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> man_made=petroleum_well

thank you for bringing this up. I just noticed you have added a deprecation 
note on

man_made=gas_well

and suggest to use man_made=petroleum_well for gas wells. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dgas_well

are we sure the term petroleum well  covers gas wells? (there is usually also 
some gas to deal with when extracting ”stone oil”, but a petroleum well which 
extracts only gas can still be called an “oil well”?)

Cheers Martin 


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

Re: [Tagging] man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Jmapb via Tagging]

On 2/26/2020 3:54 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

There are some users on the wiki who seem to treat these two tags as
near-synonyms

man_made=petroleum_well
man_made=pumping_rig

The later was approved, but the first is much more common.

The proposal in 2008 for pumping_rig said

"A tag for pumping platforms - gas, oil, etc. The rig may be on ground or water"

But petroleum_well says just: "An oil well is a boring in the Earth
that is designed to bring petroleum oil or gas to the surface."

I believe not all petrolum wells have a pumping rig? Can someone
confirm that these tags are different?


Oil wells generally begin with a boring apparatus housed in a vertical
derrick (drilling tower). Depending on the circumstances, the derrick
might be dismantled when the well is ready for production.

Once a well is in production, a pumping rig (which I'd call a pumpjack)
is installed, to pull the crude up and into a pipeline or storage tank.
It's possible to have multiple pumpjacks for a single well -- they're
not synonymous.

It's also possible to have a functioning petroleum well without any
notable surface-level equipment, especially a gas well.

Jason



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Food sharing

[Markus Peloso]

Thanks, Markus, for your feedback.

I agree with you, network fit better then brand.

I remove charity I think it is not usefull because it do not fit. The little 
free pantry is more about food for people in need. My intention was to document 
this with charity=yes.

Best regards

Markus aka ToastHawaii

Von: Markus
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 12:03
An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Food sharing

Thanks, Markus, for writing this proposal. I like the proposed tag.

Just two minor things regarding tags that can be used in combination:

- brand=* Optional. Name of the brand or network of the facility if
there is one visible. eg.

I would change this to network=* as it seems to fit better. brand=* is
mainly used for the brand of items being sold while we're already
using network=* for bicycle sharing networks.

- charity=* Optional. Add charity=yes if the food for those in need.

It's not clear to me what you mean: a place where you can only donate
food or a place where you can bring food but only poor people are
allowed to take it away? If you have the first scenario in mind
(donating only), i would rather use amenity=recycling, analogous to
recycling:clothes=yes.

Regards

Markus aka SelfishSeahorse

___
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] Feature Proposal - Voting - drinking_water:refill_scheme

[European Water Project]

Hello,

Since no one has manifested an objection (still not too late), I am going
to amend the final voted tag pair to :

drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;

Can someone please guide me on the below.  I appreciate your advice.  I
would like to complete all tasks associated with this tag implementation.

1. How do I change the name of the proposal page to better match what was
voted ?... The page name corresponds to the one of the first interactions.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Free_Water

2. How do I create the permanent feature page ? (should I create a second
one for "drinking_water:refill:network" or include it on the primary page ?)

3.  I will need guidance on the next three steps as well, but this can come
after completion of 1 + 2.
- Add a link back to the proposal by using the *statuslink* parameter of
the feature template.
- Add a link to the permanent feature page in the proposal page using
Template:Approved
feature link
.
- Archive the proposal using Template:Archived proposal
.

Best regards,

Stuart


On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 15:29, European Water Project <
europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> As per yesterday's note, I would like to make the following tweek to the
> tag pair as per the suggestion from Kovposch for the final write-up.
>
> drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
> drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;
>
>
> instead of :
>
> drinking_water:refill=yes/drinking_water:refill=no
> drinking_water:refill_scheme=scheme-name1;scheme-name2;scheme-name3;
>
> Does anyone believe another round of voting is necessary for this small
> change ?  I don't mind.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Stuart
>
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 09:33, European Water Project <
> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Again,
>>
>> In addition to the previous email regarding voting outcome, I think it is
>> worth discussing the suggestion of  Kovposch to make refill a namespace and
>> use the word network.
>>
>> This would change the second tag of the tag pair to
>> drinking_water:refill:network=network-name1;network-name2;network-name3;
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have an opinion on this? I personally prefer this namespace
>> convention because of I find it more generic and I find the word "network"
>> clearer than "scheme".
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 09:27, European Water Project <
>> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> The proposal for tagging bars, restaurants, cafés, kiosks, which refill
>>> water bottles for free as part of a refill scheme or as an independent
>>> passes with 13 positive votes and three abstentions.  Please note, that to
>>> be tagged drinking_water:refill = yes, it is imperative that a sign is
>>> evident so that the tag is verifiable.
>>>
>>> The tag that has been voted positively takes into account the clear
>>> preference for delimiting individual scheme names with semicolons - which
>>> is common with other tags.
>>>
>>>
>>>- drinking_water:refill
>>>
>>> 
>>>=yes
>>>
>>> 
>>>/drinking_water:refill
>>>
>>> 
>>>=no
>>>
>>> 
>>>- drinking_water:refill_scheme
>>>
>>> 
>>>=scheme-name
>>>
>>> 
>>>1; scheme-name
>>>
>>> 
>>>2;scheme-name3;
>>>
>>>
>>> Can someone please guide me on next steps ?
>>>
>>>
>>>- Create the permanent feature description page:
>>>
>>>
>>>- A new page for the feature should be created and the relevant map 
>>> features
>>>template
>>> 
>>> (depending
>>>on whether it is a key, a value, or a relation) should be applied. Follow
>>>the standard set by the Key:highway
>>> key and its values.
>>>- Add a link back to the proposal by using the *statuslink* parameter
>>>of the feature template.
>>>- Add a link to the permanent feature page in the proposal page
>>>using Template:Approved feature link
>>>.
>>>   

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Food sharing

[Markus]

Thanks, Markus, for writing this proposal. I like the proposed tag.

Just two minor things regarding tags that can be used in combination:

- brand=* Optional. Name of the brand or network of the facility if
there is one visible. eg.

I would change this to network=* as it seems to fit better. brand=* is
mainly used for the brand of items being sold while we're already
using network=* for bicycle sharing networks.

- charity=* Optional. Add charity=yes if the food for those in need.

It's not clear to me what you mean: a place where you can only donate
food or a place where you can bring food but only poor people are
allowed to take it away? If you have the first scenario in mind
(donating only), i would rather use amenity=recycling, analogous to
recycling:clothes=yes.

Regards

Markus aka SelfishSeahorse

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

Re: [Tagging] Annual Shows

[Philip Barnes]

On Wednesday, 26 February 2020, Marc Gemis wrote:
> What about music festivals? I live close to the area that hosts one of
> the biggest festivals in the world: Tomorrowland. [1]
> The festival takes place in a former quarry, which is a park for the
> rest of the year, although it hosts some smaller yearly events as
> well.
> The festival started as a one-day festival, but is now spread over 2
> weekends, typically the last 2 weekends of July and attracts more than
> 400.000 participants from all over the world (spread over the 2
> weekends).
> The camping site for the music festival is spread over the meadows in
> the neighbouring villages. Should those be mapped as well?
> 
> regards
> 
> m.
> 
> 
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrowland_(festival)

The big music festival in the UK is Glastonbury. The festival is not mapped as 
most of the time it is a farm.

However Worthy Farm is mapped in some detail and can be found in OSM quite 
easily.

Phil (trigpoint)



> 
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:37 PM Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 05:01, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > These shows do take place at a permanent site.
> > >
> > > They take place annually, floods, fire, droughts and wars excepted.
> > >
> > > The dates may vary depending on various things, but usually around the 
> > > same time each year.
> > >
> > > They are part of Australian culture, and it would seem British culture.
> >
> > I also wish for a settled tag for a regular, locally important event
> > that is repeatedly or always held at a given site.
> >
> > I have tagged location of one such in Canada with landuse=fairground
> > but this doesn't seem perfect and landuse key doesn't logically lend
> > itself well to specifying details about the events that might be
> > taking place there. A lot of fairgrounds in Canada end up being tagged
> > as a park for lack of a better description.
> >
> > See also related discussion in
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/leisure%3Devents
> >
> > --Jarek
> >
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] man_made=petroleum_well vs man_made=pumping_rig

[Joseph Eisenberg]

There are some users on the wiki who seem to treat these two tags as
near-synonyms

man_made=petroleum_well
man_made=pumping_rig

The later was approved, but the first is much more common.

The proposal in 2008 for pumping_rig said

"A tag for pumping platforms - gas, oil, etc. The rig may be on ground or water"

But petroleum_well says just: "An oil well is a boring in the Earth
that is designed to bring petroleum oil or gas to the surface."

I believe not all petrolum wells have a pumping rig? Can someone
confirm that these tags are different?

- Joseph Eisenberg

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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Food sharing

[Markus Peloso]

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

«A shelf/box/fridge where people drop off and pick up food in the sense of free 
sharing and/or to reduce food waste.»

Hi

I added the current proposal for food sharing I made to the wiki.

What do you think about it?

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

Re: [Tagging] Annual Shows

[Marc Gemis]

What about music festivals? I live close to the area that hosts one of
the biggest festivals in the world: Tomorrowland. [1]
The festival takes place in a former quarry, which is a park for the
rest of the year, although it hosts some smaller yearly events as
well.
The festival started as a one-day festival, but is now spread over 2
weekends, typically the last 2 weekends of July and attracts more than
400.000 participants from all over the world (spread over the 2
weekends).
The camping site for the music festival is spread over the meadows in
the neighbouring villages. Should those be mapped as well?

regards

m.


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrowland_(festival)

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:37 PM Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 05:01, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > These shows do take place at a permanent site.
> >
> > They take place annually, floods, fire, droughts and wars excepted.
> >
> > The dates may vary depending on various things, but usually around the same 
> > time each year.
> >
> > They are part of Australian culture, and it would seem British culture.
>
> I also wish for a settled tag for a regular, locally important event
> that is repeatedly or always held at a given site.
>
> I have tagged location of one such in Canada with landuse=fairground
> but this doesn't seem perfect and landuse key doesn't logically lend
> itself well to specifying details about the events that might be
> taking place there. A lot of fairgrounds in Canada end up being tagged
> as a park for lack of a better description.
>
> See also related discussion in
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/leisure%3Devents
>
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> 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] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

[Joseph Eisenberg]

After 2 weeks, the discussion at Talk:Proposal_process shows 10 people
in favor of considering an abstention the same as not voting, except
for the quorum, and 1 opposed:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposal_process#Clarify_whatever_explicit_abstaining_is_the_same_as_no_vote

"In approved/rejected decision ignore explicit abstentions (10 vote
yes, 1 vote no, 10 "abstain but have comments" would be approved).
In case of describing number of people use "N people participated in
voting" (when including explicit abstentions) or "M people voted"
(when including only yes/no votes, without abstain comments)"

Does anyone else want to add their comments or votes there? This seems
to be a rough consensus now.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/14/20, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> Am Fr., 14. Feb. 2020 um 10:43 Uhr schrieb European Water Project <
> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> According to wikipedia
>>
>> "Abstentions do not *count* in tallying the *vote* negatively or
>> positively; when members *abstain*, they are in effect attending only to
>> contribute to a quorum. "
>>
>> Do you think abstention should be equivalent to a no vote for the final
>> tally ?
>>
>
>
>
> While I admit at first I have found it strange in the past, that (explicit)
> abstentions had the same effect on the counted result than voting no, I do
> not think it is a real problem and the quoted text from Wikipedia, while
> generally not relevant for OSM votes, does not contradict the way we are
> counting. We do not "count" abstentions as no, and neither as "yes", so
> while they will contribute to the quorum, they will not be counted as yes
> or no.
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>

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