On 14 December 2011 14:11, Nick Austin wrote:
> The risers I've seen can only be properly identified by close up
> inspection, it's generally just a metal half-tube nailed to one side
> of the pole through which the cable then passes. Identification of
> which poles have risers can only be done b
The risers I've seen can only be properly identified by close up
inspection, it's generally just a metal half-tube nailed to one side
of the pole through which the cable then passes. Identification of
which poles have risers can only be done by close-up inspection.
However as far as the UK is conc
Le mer. 14 d�c. 2011 à 12:50 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer a ecrit :
> 2011/12/14 LM_1 :
> > tower:riser=yes seems good and in need it could be enhanced with yes
> > being replaced by power, telecommunication etc. For basic processing
> > it is simple (any value but "no" means some sort of riser) if m
2011/12/14 LM_1 :
> tower:riser=yes seems good and in need it could be enhanced with yes
> being replaced by power, telecommunication etc. For basic processing
> it is simple (any value but "no" means some sort of riser) if more
> precise info is needed, the information is there.
Is this really a
tower:riser=yes seems good and in need it could be enhanced with yes
being replaced by power, telecommunication etc. For basic processing
it is simple (any value but "no" means some sort of riser) if more
precise info is needed, the information is there.
LM_1
2011/12/14 Владимир Поквалитов :
>> I'
> I'd suggest to use
> power:riser=yes instead of riser=power (to remain compatible if we
> should decide to map telco lines as well in the future, so we could
> use telecommunication:riser for those).
I'd suggest to use "tower:riser=yes" (or "tower:riser=*"). So we can
use the same tag not only f
Just to make things a bit more complicated, there are also pylons
(Wikipedia: transmission tower, OSM: tower=power) with three power lines
connected.
>From a map users point of view what is important? The position of the
pylons, and the overhead lines that you can see. Underground cables that
conn
Le mar. 13 dec. 2011 à 14:13 +0100, Erik Johansson a ecrit :
> I would really like you to expand on why adding
> "riser=power_line;tele_communication" would make things difficult to
> map. Though I think it might be hard to visualize making accidental
> deletions a worry.
>
> Risers seems to be
2011/12/13 Erik Johansson :
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 21:12, Nick Austin wrote:
>> 3) Where three cables meet one of two of them may come up a riser and
>> it's impossible to tell which is the supply cable and which is leading
>> to a destination.
>> 4) When underground cables fail they are often
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 21:12, Nick Austin wrote:
> 3) Where three cables meet one of two of them may come up a riser and
> it's impossible to tell which is the supply cable and which is leading
> to a destination.
> 4) When underground cables fail they are often abandoned and left in
> place. The
Le lun. 12 dec. 2011 à 20:12 +, Nick Austin a ecrit :
> Hi,
>
> I've heard the term riser used before but only in the context of
> getting pipes and cables into tall buildings. I can't offer an opinion
> as to whether it's the right term or not.
>
> As far as the UK is concerned this won't he
Hi,
I've heard the term riser used before but only in the context of
getting pipes and cables into tall buildings. I can't offer an opinion
as to whether it's the right term or not.
As far as the UK is concerned this won't help much for many reasons:
1) Poles are often shared with telephone and f
Hello,
I would like to propose a new tag on a power=tower (or power=pole) node.
riser=yes
to explain that the power line comes up from underground at this tower/pole.
This would be an equivalent to noexit=yes for the roads, and would allow to
quality analysis tools to better handle this situatio
13 matches
Mail list logo
