Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi all,

Due to interesting remarks made while voting, vote is now closed and
delayed until some work will be done.
This discussion can be continued as needed following your concern.

Thank you for your ideas and remarks so far.



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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[marc marc]

Le 23. 01. 18 à 14:25, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
 > I would prefer waterway=canal + pressurised=yes + tunnel=* rather
 > than waterway=pressurised.

trivial in appearance, this change would imply a huge change of meaning.
today common sense is that waterway=canal is a canal :-) thus not 
pressurized.
your modification would mean that waterway=canal is either a canal or 
pressurized. it implies that 300,000 objects would have to be reviewed 
to add the lost information.
and each time a contributor forgets the pressurised tag, we won't know 
if he saw a channel or a pipeline, which is still 2 totally different 
objects.
or we have to assume he saw the most common object.
it's really not a good solution for data quality.

Le 24. 01. 18 à 12:02, François Lacombe a écrit :
> Why free flow should get a waterway and pressurised none ?
> I find this confusing.

I agree.
it is positive that the current proposal brings continuity
with a waterways=* for all the water flow.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

2018-01-23 18:17 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić :

> I would like to add tunnel=headrace to the waterway=drain because that's
> how they are called. Just google "headrace tunnel" and this is exactly what
> you will get.
>

This is a great add, thank you. I've missed this terminology, and vote may
be stopped to refine the proposal.
tunnel=headrace solve pretty big issue I had with tunnel=culvert


>
> That's why I would like to tag those pipelines as man_made=pipeline +
> pipeline=penstock. "Penstock" by itself means that the pipeline is
> pressurized, but we can add "pressurized=yes" just to be safe
> (waterway=pressurized is a funny tag to me).
>

It's already done with man_made=pipeline + usage=penstock

Given consistency issue I see is free flow headrace comes with
waterway=drain + tunnel = headrace but pressurized headrace or penstock
with man_made=pipeline only.
Why free flow should get a waterway and pressurised none ?
I find this confusing.

Here what is proposed, separate water from "man made" structures (cut view)
: https://imgur.com/a/3KWqZ


> Using waterway=drain for underground rivers is not very accurate. I think
> a new waterway tag is needed here, because this is a new concept. I suggest
> waterway=subterranean_river. And if it has a siphon, add
> subterranean_river=syphon.
>

This is the unsolved issue I mentioned on the image, but proposal wasn't
intended to cover it.
waterway=drain should be kept on artifical path, I wasn't proposing to use
it on natural underground river.

waterway=subterranean_river sounds ok for me anyway.


>
> So, I made an image with my suggestions, changes are bolded and underlined
> (I love your images, they are worth a thousand words :)
>
> https://imgur.com/a/obdNd
>

Thanks


2018-01-23 18:30 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić :
>Calling pipelines waterway=pressurized because it would be easier for you
to extract it and render it makes this tagging for the renderer. Tags
should be as consistent as possible for the mappers, not data consumers. If
a mapper sees a pipeline, and you tell him "tag that as
waterway=pressurized because then my SQL query can be nice and short" the
mapper is going to get annoyed and quit. If it's a pipeline, tag it as a
man_made=pipeline, and that's it. Somebody else can tag the type of a
pipeline, but nobody is suposed to think about SQL queries when mapping.

I gave my personal experience. Prior to do sql queries or really particular
stuff, there are models to be done. I'm not only doing rendering but
routing also.
Tagging isn't currently consistent for mappers at all since they are
encouraged to use waterway=canal to tag underground features.

I agree there's no point to adapt tagging for sql queries, and it's not
what I'm doing.
It's all about data model and semantics.

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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Janko Mihelić]

uto, 23. sij 2018. u 16:16 François Lacombe 
napisao je:

>
> To get the whole hydrographic system, users have to query waterway,
> pipeline and some other keys not all related to water.
> If all water paths would have only waterway=*, this would be simpler and
> sustainable.
> Would you be happy if I remove highway=* from tunnels or bridges just
> because it's not "natural" roads?
>
> Not to mention standard osm render doesn't currently render pipelines.
> Introducing a new value of waterway, already imported in mapnik schema may
> be simpler than adding pipeline and some extra keys.
>

Calling pipelines waterway=pressurized because it would be easier for you
to extract it and render it makes this tagging for the renderer. Tags
should be as consistent as possible for the mappers, not data consumers. If
a mapper sees a pipeline, and you tell him "tag that as
waterway=pressurized because then my SQL query can be nice and short" the
mapper is going to get annoyed and quit. If it's a pipeline, tag it as a
man_made=pipeline, and that's it. Somebody else can tag the type of a
pipeline, but nobody is suposed to think about SQL queries when mapping.

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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Janko Mihelić]

I would like to add tunnel=headrace to the waterway=drain because that's
how they are called. Just google "headrace tunnel" and this is exactly what
you will get.

The pressurized pipeline that goes into the hydro power plant is called
"penstock":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penstock

That's why I would like to tag those pipelines as man_made=pipeline +
pipeline=penstock. "Penstock" by itself means that the pipeline is
pressurized, but we can add "pressurized=yes" just to be safe
(waterway=pressurized is a funny tag to me).

Using waterway=drain for underground rivers is not very accurate. I think a
new waterway tag is needed here, because this is a new concept. I suggest
waterway=subterranean_river. And if it has a siphon, add
subterranean_river=syphon.

So, I made an image with my suggestions, changes are bolded and underlined
(I love your images, they are worth a thousand words :)

https://imgur.com/a/obdNd

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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

2018-01-23 16:41 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny :

> >  Not to mention standard osm render doesn't currently render pipelines.
> > Introducing a new value of waterway, already imported in mapnik schema
> > may be simpler than adding pipeline and some extra keys.
>
> Changing tagging scheme as workaround for a single database is a really
> poor idea.
>

That wasn't my point.
All mapnik and osm2pgsql based projects will have to rebuilt their db to
eventually render pipeline as to get extra water paths.


No, because it changes current tagging scheme without a good reason.
> I suspect that this proposal may be doing the same (changing tagging
> scheme without real benefit)
>

Good, bad are so subjective.
Can't we talk about consistency or sustainability of using words in place
of another (canal, tunnel, ...)?


>
> >> Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will improve
> situation?
> >To get the whole hydrographic system, users have to query waterway,
> > pipeline and some other keys not all related to water.
> > If all water paths would have only waterway=*, this would be simpler and
> sustainable.
>
> a) to repeat - Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it
> will improve
> situation?
>

This will prevent database rebuilt on my data collectors for instance,
because I'm already collecting waterway key, but not pipeline
Since it's time consuming for me to get all waterways data, I try to find a
sustainable solution to prevent other from facing such an issue.

Anyway and according to you, changing tagging for a particular case is a
poor idea.
The proposal wasn't intended for my particular situation, but because I
find this tagging more comprehensive and understandable for everyone.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Mateusz Konieczny]

>  Not to mention standard osm render doesn't currently render pipelines.
> Introducing a new value of waterway, already imported in mapnik schema
> may be simpler than adding pipeline and some extra keys.

Changing tagging scheme as workaround for a single database is a really
poor idea.

> Would you be happy if I remove highway=* from tunnels or bridges just
because it's not "natural" roads?

No, because it changes current tagging scheme without a good reason.
I suspect that this proposal may be doing the same (changing tagging scheme
without real benefit)

>> Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will improve
situation?
>To get the whole hydrographic system, users have to query waterway,
> pipeline and some other keys not all related to water.
> If all water paths would have only waterway=*, this would be simpler and
sustainable.

a) to repeat - Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will
improve
situation?

b)  I see noi value in duplicating existing data into waterway key.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

2018-01-23 14:25 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny :

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:45:18 +0100
> François Lacombe  wrote:
>
> > and ease access of water data with the use of existing waterway key
>
> Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will improve
> situation?
>
> From somebody making maps from OSM data - it will make situation worse for
> me,
> not better (even more waterway values to handle).
>

To get the whole hydrographic system, users have to query waterway,
pipeline and some other keys not all related to water.
If all water paths would have only waterway=*, this would be simpler and
sustainable.
Would you be happy if I remove highway=* from tunnels or bridges just
because it's not "natural" roads?

Not to mention standard osm render doesn't currently render pipelines.
Introducing a new value of waterway, already imported in mapnik schema may
be simpler than adding pipeline and some extra keys.


> As data consumer I would prefer to have general tags - for example, in my
> data processing I would prefer to have
> spillways mapped as waterway=canal + intermittent=yes rather than
> waterway=spillway.
>

But it's not what an actual canal is !
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Grand_Union_Canal.jpg
How many fake canals are mapped right now just because mappers don't find a
more suitable value ?


> Also I would prefer waterway=canal + pressurised=yes + tunnel=* rather
> than waterway=pressurised.
>
> In general, in OSM data processing where I participate and waterway
> values are used I would prefer to avoid fragmentation of waterway tag
> values.
>

I find this inconsistent after adding many man_made values (like dams,
weir... not directly referring to water) in waterway key.
I'm proposing to make it more consistent precisely regarding water


> I know that what I am doing is a tiny subset of what can be done with OSM
> but I am curious of what is the source of claims that new scheme will be
> better.
>

Regarding my particular situation too, i'm a data scientist in an industry
oriented software developper team.
OSM data become more and more valuable for us. It would be a lot more if
words were used according to their actual meaning.
As an individual contributor, i find some keys really messy and spend a
great time trying to improve this.

As said on wiki page, having a new value in an established key is an
opportunity to write a better documentation, stop awkward usage and build
more comprehensive preset handling in editor.
It's not all about the data itself but its collection and ideas exposed to
contributors.

2018-01-23 14:43 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> +1 for this, as I can imagine pressurised waterways appearing in any
size, so making pressurised an attribute could make sense.

Context is more important than size to pressure water.

waterway=canal sounds to be dedicated to open air man made built to divert
water for a particular purpose.
Don't you find waterway=canal + pressurised=yes inconsistent since canal is
open air channel?

Introduce waterway=pressurised prevent its irrelevant use with other
incompatible waterway values.


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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-01-23 14:25 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny :

> As data consumer I would prefer to have general tags - for example, in my
> data processing I would prefer to have
> spillways mapped as waterway=canal + intermittent=yes rather than
> waterway=spillway.
>


or maybe waterway:function / waterway:subtype=spillway ? This way the
spillway function is not tied to the waterway size, as it would be with
canal=spillway.
While intermittent=yes is somehow true, I guess spillways aren't the only
reason for a canal to be intermittent.



>
> Also I would prefer waterway=canal + pressurised=yes + tunnel=* rather
> than waterway=pressurised.
>
>

+1 for this, as I can imagine pressurised waterways appearing in any size,
so making pressurised an attribute could make sense.


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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:45:18 +0100
François Lacombe  wrote:

> and ease access of water data with the use of existing waterway key

Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will improve
situation?

>From somebody making maps from OSM data - it will make situation worse for
me,
not better (even more waterway values to handle).

As data consumer I would prefer to have general tags - for example, in my
data processing I would prefer to have
spillways mapped as waterway=canal + intermittent=yes rather than
waterway=spillway.

Also I would prefer waterway=canal + pressurised=yes + tunnel=* rather
than waterway=pressurised.

In general, in OSM data processing where I participate and waterway
values are used I would prefer to avoid fragmentation of waterway tag
values.

I know that what I am doing is a tiny subset of what can be done with OSM
but I am curious of what is the source of claims that new scheme will be
better.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Regarding power plants involving lakes upstream of tunnels or pipelines,
this won't affect the current proposal :
lakes are mapped as areas waterway=riverbanks or natural=water or whatever.

But tunnels / drains / pipelines connects to streams/river feeding the lake
(watershed) and not to riverbanks or water areas.

Then, lake or not, all is about linear topology and waterway=pressurised is
extending river, stream, canal...
See here : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5355138006

François

2018-01-22 21:11 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe :

> This has been under RFC for 2 month.
>
> I'm not native English speaker so please, you decide.
>
> https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/pressurize
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/dictionnaire/anglais/pressurized
>
> Both stands for pressurised in British English.
>
>
> François
>
>
> 2018-01-22 21:06 GMT+01:00 Steve Doerr :
>
>> ize is correct British English spelling - see the Oxford English
>> Dictionary.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 22 Jan 2018, at 19:14, Colin Smale  wrote:
>>
>> How about waterway=pressurised (with an s instead of a z) for correct
>> (British) English spelling which (unless I have missed something) is still
>> the lingua franca of OSM?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2018-01-22 19:40, François Lacombe wrote:
>>
>> Hi Volker,
>>
>> waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping
>> hydropower plants.
>> The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.
>>
>> I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is
>> pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to
>> start pumping)
>> Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489
>> Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488
>>
>> They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.
>>
>> Is this clear for you ?
>>
>> François
>>
>> 2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>>
>>> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water
>>> pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley),
>>> and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
>>> Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly
>>> some components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely
>>> in function.
>>> I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

This has been under RFC for 2 month.

I'm not native English speaker so please, you decide.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/pressurize
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/dictionnaire/anglais/pressurized

Both stands for pressurised in British English.


François

2018-01-22 21:06 GMT+01:00 Steve Doerr :

> ize is correct British English spelling - see the Oxford English
> Dictionary.
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 22 Jan 2018, at 19:14, Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> How about waterway=pressurised (with an s instead of a z) for correct
> (British) English spelling which (unless I have missed something) is still
> the lingua franca of OSM?
>
>
>
> On 2018-01-22 19:40, François Lacombe wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
> waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping
> hydropower plants.
> The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.
>
> I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is
> pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to
> start pumping)
> Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489
> Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488
>
> They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.
>
> Is this clear for you ?
>
> François
>
> 2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>
>> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water
>> pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley),
>> and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
>> Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly some
>> components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely in
>> function.
>> I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
> ___
> 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] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Steve Doerr]

ize is correct British English spelling - see the Oxford English Dictionary. 

Steve 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 22 Jan 2018, at 19:14, Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
> How about waterway=pressurised (with an s instead of a z) for correct 
> (British) English spelling which (unless I have missed something) is still 
> the lingua franca of OSM?
> 
>  
> 
> 
>> On 2018-01-22 19:40, François Lacombe wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Volker,
>> 
>> waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping hydropower 
>> plants.
>> The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.
>> 
>> I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is 
>> pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to 
>> start pumping)
>> Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489
>> Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488
>> 
>> They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.
>>  
>> Is this clear for you ?
>>  
>> François
>> 
>> 2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>>> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water 
>>> pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley), 
>>> and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
>>> Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly some 
>>> components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely in 
>>> function.
>>> I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi Colin,

This is right, I've missed the "uk usual" here :
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/dictionnaire/anglais/pressurized

I think I can change this without breaking anything.


All the best

François

2018-01-22 20:14 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale :

> How about waterway=pressurised (with an s instead of a z) for correct
> (British) English spelling which (unless I have missed something) is still
> the lingua franca of OSM?
>
>
>
> On 2018-01-22 19:40, François Lacombe wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
> waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping
> hydropower plants.
> The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.
>
> I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is
> pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to
> start pumping)
> Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489
> Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488
>
> They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.
>
> Is this clear for you ?
>
> François
>
> 2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>
>> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water
>> pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley),
>> and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
>> Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly some
>> components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely in
>> function.
>> I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Colin Smale]

How about waterway=pressurised (with an s instead of a z) for correct
(British) English spelling which (unless I have missed something) is
still the lingua franca of OSM?

On 2018-01-22 19:40, François Lacombe wrote:

> Hi Volker,
> 
> waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping hydropower 
> plants. The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.
> 
> I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is 
> pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to 
> start pumping) Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489 
> Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488
> 
> They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.
> 
> Is this clear for you ? 
> 
> François 
> 
> 2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
> 
>> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water pumping 
>> stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley), and most 
>> likely hundreds of thousands world-wide. Not sure if it makes sense to put 
>> it in the same proposal. Certainly some components are identical at least in 
>> appearance, but also most likely in function. I see them daily,but am not an 
>> expert, unfortunately
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1]
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 

Links:
--
[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi Volker,

waterway=pressurized is compatible with both standard and pumping
hydropower plants.
The doesn't cover power parts and hydraulic parts may be the same.

I've tested this tagging on a site with 2 different power plants, one is
pumping and the second is standard (last is used to power up the first to
start pumping)
Pumping : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113489
Standard : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3113488

They use the same pipes, with waterway=pressurized on it.

Is this clear for you ?

François

2018-01-22 19:12 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :

> I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water
> pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley),
> and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
> Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly some
> components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely in
> function.
> I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Volker Schmidt]

I would suggest to have something similar for the thousands of water
pumping stations here in the Veneto region of Northern Italy (Po valley),
and most likely hundreds of thousands world-wide.
Not sure if it makes sense to put it in the same proposal. Certainly some
components are identical at least in appearance, but also most likely in
function.
I see them daily,but am not an expert, unfortunately
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Thanks Martin,

Indeed, such power plant are very interesting and sometimes really huge.
It can be an additional criteria for waterway=pressurized since water
between plant and storage always and necessarily pipe flows.

I'll think to add it during wiki cleanup if applicable

François

*François Lacombe*

fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
www.infos-reseaux.com
@InfosReseaux 

2018-01-22 17:55 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

> Great proposal, I just wanted to mention that there are also pumped
> storage plants (fr:Pompage-turbinage), where the upper reservoir is filled
> by means of pumps (in case of ecessive power available) and not naturally
> by a river or similar.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
>
>
> 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] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Great proposal, I just wanted to mention that there are also pumped storage
plants (fr:Pompage-turbinage), where the upper reservoir is filled by means
of pumps (in case of ecessive power available) and not naturally by a river
or similar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity


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

[Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi all,

This proposal is now available for voting
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Hydropower_water_supplies

This picture summarizes the topic a bit
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_flows.png

Main goal is to involve pressurized waterways in the global hydrographic
graph and ease access of water data with the use of existing waterway key.
Waterway=* use to be used about free flowing features, but actually isn't
restricted to.

Despite its title, this proposal deals about a much more wide family of
pressurized waterways, including natural siphons for speleologists.


Thanks in advance for your time, all the best

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