Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
Am 15/gen/2013 um 09:28 schrieb Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: The green around would be a leisure=park, landcover=grass. if this is referring to areas inside the fencing I wouldn't tag them as park, you could add some landcover for the grass but generally they are already tagged correctly as part of the water park Now the question is where to put the name, opening_hours etc. I did put it on the leisure=water_park border, because it is the overall thing yes, you can put it on the area object that is tagged with leisure=water_park, this could also be a multipolygon relation cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
Hi again, 2013/1/15 Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: 2013/1/15 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com (I may also add landuse=basin, but this may be overkill.) I don't think it's overkill I think it's wrong. Although a swimming pool is An area of land artificially graded to hold water. it doesn't feel right. Have a look at the subkey basin and its values. Ok. I was just looking for a key to maybe use for water features that are so clearly not for swimming that I hesitate to use the swimming_pool tag. E.g.: childrens basins, the high diving basin, the pool at the end of the waterslide etc. Got your point... but landuse=basin doesn't seem right. I don't think that we have a fitting tag here. My feeling tells me that something like leisure=basin could fit. Yes, I know, it's again basin, but this time we clearly state it's a basin for leisure. As an alternative landuse=basin + basin=leisure might be ok, but - at least to me - it again doesn't feel right. Tag the playing fields as e.g. leisure=pitch, sport=volleyball, surface=sand, further features as amenity = playground, amenity=showers, amenity=toilets, amenity=fast_food etc, mostly attached to a building=yes if appropriate. The green around would be a leisure=park, landcover=grass. Hm... is leisure=park really useful/correct here. You already tagged the whole area with leisure=water_park and in my understanding this means that everything that's not tagged as a specific feature or building is green. Maybe I explained that wrong. I didn't want a 'background' tag just for the rest of the area, but one for the well kept green used as recreational area, taking a sun bath, let the children play etc. (As opposed to additional unkept green, bushes, trees and areas not meant for public access.) In some unfortunated urban water parks those areas might not even be green at all, but made of concrete or paved. Hmm... how about landuse=meadow + meadow=recreation ? I think the best place for some additional documentation would be the article about leisure=water_park. We should add there a list of related features with examples and links to the keys. Yes. I would volunteer to do that if I get some more feedback here. Count me in if you need some help. regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] What key for animal related amenities?
2013/1/15 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: I'm looking for a better key than amenity for any animal related feature. For example I want to tag a horse walker [1]. I could use amenity=horse_walker but this key is already flooded with pretty everything. Any ideas for a better key? IMHO animal is a good key for this, but you could also use one of the others like amenity, man_made, building, leisure ;-) Actually I think that animal is a rather bad key for this. To me this would name the animal the feature is related to. Taginfo also tells us that the main use of this key is the value yes. The other values are a mixture of features and animals. So not really a clear idea behind this key. regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
There's also an attraction=water_slide[0], it isn't rendered in the current stylesheet but it's the correct tag to use :) I'm respondible for some swimming pools multipolygons, the explaination is that in water parks there are these big water areas in which you can walk or swim, but there are some 'islands' inside. Here's an example http://osm.org/go/xT3TtKM0f-- Cheers, Stefano [0]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:attraction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
Maybe I explained that wrong. I didn't want a 'background' tag just for the rest of the area, but one for the well kept green used as recreational area, taking a sun bath, let the children play etc. (As opposed to additional unkept green, bushes, trees and areas not meant for public access.) In some unfortunated urban water parks those areas might not even be green at all, but made of concrete or paved. Hmm... how about landuse=meadow + meadow=recreation ? I remember the landuse/landcover guys being very special about a meadow being something that is deliberately mown to use the cut grass e.g. for feeding animals. Whereas my type of area is deliberately mown to NOT use the cut grass but the area the grass was cutted from. But with the new subkey, it doesn't sound that bad. regards, Chaos ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:59 AM, sabas88 saba...@gmail.com wrote: I'm respondible for some swimming pools multipolygons, the explaination is that in water parks there are these big water areas in which you can walk or swim, but there are some 'islands' inside. Here's an example http://osm.org/go/xT3TtKM0f-- In that example, features of the pools seem to have been put in the name tags: Multipista, Minifoam Multipista, Idrotubo a 2 piste, Vasca Idromassaggio. We really need a more flexible pool tagging scheme. -- Guttorm ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
2013/1/15 Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: Maybe I explained that wrong. I didn't want a 'background' tag just for the rest of the area, but one for the well kept green used as recreational area, taking a sun bath, let the children play etc. (As opposed to additional unkept green, bushes, trees and areas not meant for public access.) In some unfortunated urban water parks those areas might not even be green at all, but made of concrete or paved. Hmm... how about landuse=meadow + meadow=recreation ? I remember the landuse/landcover guys being very special about a meadow being something that is deliberately mown to use the cut grass e.g. for feeding animals. Whereas my type of area is deliberately mown to NOT use the cut grass but the area the grass was cutted from. But with the new subkey, it doesn't sound that bad. To me landuse=meadow means an area where grass is grown for some purpose. One purpose may be grazing/pasture. Another may be to lay on it. If a meadow is really used for grazing I add meadow=pasture. regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
2013/1/15 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com To me landuse=meadow means an area where grass is grown for some purpose. One purpose may be grazing/pasture. Another may be to lay on it. If a meadow is really used for grazing I add meadow=pasture. Beware! Off-topic: So technically, we could also use it for football fields? Chaos ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
2013/1/15 Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: 2013/1/15 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com To me landuse=meadow means an area where grass is grown for some purpose. One purpose may be grazing/pasture. Another may be to lay on it. If a meadow is really used for grazing I add meadow=pasture. Beware! Off-topic: So technically, we could also use it for football fields? Technically speaking? Yes. But I guess we already have a better tag for football fields ;-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
2013/1/15 Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: 2013/1/15 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com To me landuse=meadow means an area where grass is grown for some purpose. One purpose may be grazing/pasture. Another may be to lay on it. If a meadow is really used for grazing I add meadow=pasture. +1 So technically, we could also use it for football fields? I wouldn't use it for a dedicated football pitch, but for a meadow where you can occassionally play soccer it would be OK IMHO. If all you want to say is that there is grass growing I'd rather use landcover=grass. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
2013/1/15 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: If all you want to say is that there is grass growing I'd rather use landcover=grass. To me the difference between landcover=grass and landuse=meadow is the purpose: * landcover=grass: there is grass, no information about the purpose * landuse=meadow: there is grass, someone takes care of it and it is used for something regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] business closed for renovation - tagging best practice
On 2013-01-15 01:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2013/1/15 dies38...@mypacks.net: There is a fast food franchise site which is closed for renovation in my vicinity. Two questions: * Would you support or recommend tagging a transient state like 'closed for renovation'?If one were to indicate temporary closure, how would one do this? In the case of renovation, would one use a construction-related tag? I think this is done in some regions while in others it doesn't make much sense. I'd make it depend on your feeling for the OSM activity in the area: if you believe there is good chance that someone (e.g. you) will notice when they reopen and will update this in OSM you can do it, but if you see the risk that also months (or even years) after they finished the works this would probably still not be reflected by OSM I wouldn't. Cheers, Martin What about suggesting the shops to post their requests to OpenStreetBugs (1)? What and when they want. The shops have a contact=*, haven't they? And OSB has a howto for non-mappers hasn't it? A howto explaining for example that one must not say invert that one-way (seen it) but set it towards north, or towards the street end crossing with street X. Cheers, André. (1) and to post in their shops Latest shop News @ OSM.org ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] business closed for renovation - tagging best practice
2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com What about suggesting the shops to post their requests to OpenStreetBugs (1)? Or offer them a simple dedicated system to edit directly in OSM (something very simple, which offers just the tags that are connected to a certain topic, and which abstracts the tags from them, e.g. a reduced version of potlatch or iD, without the possibility to edit geometry). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22 Message: 3 Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:24:42 +0100 From: Fran?ois Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Tagging] [Proposed features/Power] Difference between aerial and underground power lines Message-ID: CAG0ygLcL4hSxqWanRpH1OiE4t2jO=shnpuwze1ubhzt-fqq...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 My basic proposal is to use power=line + location=underground instead of power=cable + location=underground. Because it would be difficult to make request with location=underground negation as for obtaining only plain aerial lines, we can use different power=* tag too for aerial and underground lines. With or without location=underground. It's hard to make a choice. What are the tagging expert's or proposal author's opinion? The goal is to obtain a well documented topology of power grids. It's important to use the right vocabulary even if it seems to be dumb or engineering stuff. Hi Francois,Excuse but despite of all the technical remarks you made, if a powerline goes underground, why bother to tag it, theyre not visible though ? I might be a NB but I got the message please tag all visible items in OSM. I even look surprised finding community borders and residential areas on the map. I wont start adding a large tube for the export of LNG or oil from here to there. Although it has some visible marks every now and then for live aircontrol of the transport system. And if you really want to proceed do you ad the dept of the line excactly ? My advise is dont do or make youre own map OSM based map on the outcome of external or your own contributions, since you cant do it yourself all alone in the end. Greetings, Hendrik ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
2013/1/15 St Niklaas st.nikl...@live.nl: Excuse but despite of all the technical remarks you made, if a powerline goes underground, why bother to tag it, theyre not visible though ? I might be a NB but I got the message please tag all visible items in OSM. I even look surprised finding community borders and residential areas on the map. The rule is to tag ground truth, that is what is on (but IMHO also below or above) the ground. It doesn't have to be visible, it must be somehow there (and someone else should be able to verify it, but this could also be by reading some publicly available sources for instance). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Hi Martin Hendrik, Nowadays, undergound power lines are part of large electric systems and are as important as aerial ones. Cartography them (and make data free on OSM) is a good way to bring reliable information about these contiental electric systems. Moreover, some projects didn't wait for me to get in business. The aim of my proposal is to refine the tagging model, not to create new for the moment. There're many ways to get data about underground lines and the best is still to watch the digging works and take photos. Regards. *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2013/1/15 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2013/1/15 St Niklaas st.nikl...@live.nl: Excuse but despite of all the technical remarks you made, if a powerline goes underground, why bother to tag it, theyre not visible though ? I might be a NB but I got the message please tag all visible items in OSM. I even look surprised finding community borders and residential areas on the map. The rule is to tag ground truth, that is what is on (but IMHO also below or above) the ground. It doesn't have to be visible, it must be somehow there (and someone else should be able to verify it, but this could also be by reading some publicly available sources for instance). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
In English, overground power transmission is done by overground power *lines *(strands of metal without insulation, using the air as insulator), underground power transmission is done by means of underground power *cables * (strands of metal with insulation) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission, #Underground transmission) For that reason I would consider power=line + location=underground at least confusing, if not contradictory. power=cable + location=underground is definitely to be preferred. Volker On 15 January 2013 14:50, François Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu wrote: undergound power lines -- Volker SCHMIDT Via del Cristo 28 35127 Padova Italy mailto:vosc...@gmail.com personal mobile: +39-340-1427105 skype: volker.schmidt ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] business closed for renovation - tagging best practice
On 2013-01-15 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com What about suggesting the shops to post their requests to OpenStreetBugs (1)? Or offer them a simple dedicated system to edit directly in OSM (something very simple, which offers just the tags that are connected to a certain topic, and which abstracts the tags from them, e.g. a reduced version of potlatch or iD, without the possibility to edit geometry). Yes, that was also on my mind when I wrote, but I have a tendency to suggest the simplest solutions. What we're talking about now is heading towards assisted or supervised tagging, you name it. Sort of what Google wisely does to prevent anyone destroying Google Maps. Could (I'm sketching and confessing you my dream :-)) the editors, both simplified as you describe and fully featured), work in password-less mode (with warning and explanation)? Then, when OSM receives a password-less change set, after testing it for coherence, it would not apply it but send it to a pool for review? Reviewers would pick and apply them effectively. The main question is: would there be enough reviewers to do the less enjoyable job of absorbing the input timely? One could think of a quota system for everyone to do his homework to earn his membership. I have many reasons (real stories) to believe that something should be done also for improving some taggers' competence or taming the flurry of careless activity of others. One idea would be extra validation optionally done by OSM itself, much the way JOSM checks the updates better than... But here, the dream is recalled fuzzily to my brain ;-) Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Of course I agree with you, Volker. But aerial line refers to all the conductors transmitting different lives/phases whereas underground power cable, at high voltage, refers to only one phase/conductor. http://www.nexans.no/eservice/Norway-no_NO/fileLibrary/Download_540199654/Norway/files/Underground_power_cables.pdf *So, many underground cables are needed to set up a line!* You may have multi-conductors cables up to 150 kV but you still have several conductors. Insulation is mandatory underground because we can't put enough space between conductors, instead of what is done in the air. The right question is *do we map cables separately or lines*? It's all about the vocabulary we use. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CnkQkGiPmbs/UFM6M2N0lUI/Ark/IMZxA3i6SmY/s1600/tunnel.png If we map cables we must do the same for both aerial and underground lines and I'm not sure it would be really efficient. 2013/1/15 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com In English, overground power transmission is done by overground power *lines *(strands of metal without insulation, using the air as insulator), underground power transmission is done by means of underground power * cables* (strands of metal with insulation) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission, #Underground transmission) For that reason I would consider power=line + location=underground at least confusing, if not contradictory. power=cable + location=underground is definitely to be preferred. Volker -- Volker SCHMIDT Via del Cristo 28 35127 Padova Italy mailto:vosc...@gmail.com personal mobile: +39-340-1427105 skype: volker.schmidt ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
This may help http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/164648452. Power lines in this case pass through an old railway tunnel. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 15/01/2013 14:31 François Lacombe wrote: Of course I agree with you, Volker. But aerial line refers to all the conductors transmitting different lives/phases whereas underground power cable, at high voltage, refers to only one phase/conductor. http://www.nexans.no/eservice/Norway-no_NO/fileLibrary/Download_540199654/Norway/files/Underground_power_cables.pdf So, many underground cables are needed to set up a line! You may have multi-conductors cables up to 150 kV but you still have several conductors. Insulation is mandatory underground because we can't put enough space between conductors, instead of what is done in the air. The right question is do we map cables separately or lines? It's all about the vocabulary we use. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CnkQkGiPmbs/UFM6M2N0lUI/Ark/IMZxA3i6SmY/s1600/tunnel.png If we map cables we must do the same for both aerial and underground lines and I'm not sure it would be really efficient. 2013/1/15 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com In English, overground power transmission is done by overground power lines (strands of metal without insulation, using the air as insulator), underground power transmission is done by means of underground power cables (strands of metal with insulation) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission, #Underground transmission) For that reason I would consider power=line + location=underground at least confusing, if not contradictory. power=cable + location=underground is definitely to be preferred. Volker -- Volker SCHMIDT Via del Cristo 28 35127 Padova Italy mailto:vosc...@gmail.com personal mobile: +39-340-1427105 skype: volker.schmidt ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- François Lacombe francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
On 2013-01-15 16:43, Philip Barnes wrote : This may help http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/164648452. Power lines in this case pass through an old railway tunnel. Shouldn't the tag be voltage:power=40 ? ;-) Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Nice example Phil, thanks a lot. My tagging scheme works great with it : power=line + locaion=underground :) 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Shouldn't the tag be voltage:power=40 ? ;-) No problem I mean : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:voltage *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] business closed for renovation - tagging best practice
On 15/01/13 14:17, A.Pirard.Papou wrote: On 2013-01-15 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com What about suggesting the shops to post their requests to OpenStreetBugs (1)? Or offer them a simple dedicated system to edit directly in OSM (something very simple, which offers just the tags that are connected to a certain topic, and which abstracts the tags from them, e.g. a reduced version of potlatch or iD, without the possibility to edit geometry). Yes, that was also on my mind when I wrote, but I have a tendency to suggest the simplest solutions. What we're talking about now is heading towards assisted or supervised tagging, you name it. Sort of what Google wisely does to prevent anyone destroying Google Maps. Could (I'm sketching and confessing you my dream :-)) the editors, both simplified as you describe and fully featured), work in password-less mode (with warning and explanation)? Then, when OSM receives a password-less change set, after testing it for coherence, it would not apply it but send it to a pool for review? Reviewers would pick and apply them effectively. The main question is: would there be enough reviewers to do the less enjoyable job of absorbing the input timely? One could think of a quota system for everyone to do his homework to earn his membership. I have many reasons (real stories) to believe that something should be done also for improving some taggers' competence or taming the flurry of careless activity of others. One idea would be extra validation optionally done by OSM itself, much the way JOSM checks the updates better than... But here, the dream is recalled fuzzily to my brain ;-) Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging I expressed a similar idea some months ago but with all edits. But this seems to be a much simpler version of it and easier to implement. It could be implemented in a way that it could categorise the work between designated areas, like countries or large areas within them so people could limit themselves to areas they're more familiar with. If I'd accept such a suggested change, I'd be responsible for it as the edit would be registered to my account. Not all business owners have time or the interest to learn about all the available tags in OSM, nevermind registering for an account and apply them correctly. Such a system would have the potential to partially solve this problem. - Svavar Kjarrval signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Not my mapping, just somewhere I've been walking and thought wonder if it had been mapped. Phil -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 15/01/2013 16:06 François Lacombe wrote: Nice example Phil, thanks a lot. My tagging scheme works great with it : power=line + locaion=underground :) 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Shouldn't the tag be voltage:power=40 ? ;-) No problem I mean : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:voltage François Lacombe francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
Just to be sure, I have consulted my professional electrical engineer colleagues. We agree that there is some space for ambiguity. When one (overground) power line (which is composed of several conductors) goes underground, the power line continues as one or several underground cables, depending on the technical implementation. High-power lines are always implemented underground as several cables with every cable carrying one conductor, as seems to be shown in the example picture https://lh3.ggpht.com/-CnkQkGiPmbs/UFM6M2N0lUI/Ark/IMZxA3i6SmY/s1600/tunnel.png My conclusion: I would simply suggest to accept both power=line and power=cable as equivalent. The average mapper is not an electrical engineer after all. Volker On 15 January 2013 17:21, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: Not my mapping, just somewhere I've been walking and thought wonder if it had been mapped. Phil -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 15/01/2013 16:06 François Lacombe wrote: Nice example Phil, thanks a lot. My tagging scheme works great with it : power=line + locaion=underground :) 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Shouldn't the tag be voltage:power=40 ? ;-) No problem I mean : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:voltage *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
In my mind, average mapper (with engineering degree or not, someone who don't want get busy with hard specialized technical stuff) only see the line. The line is the base concept of all the rest. It support tags and circuits relations. It can has 1 or several conductors, that's not the point at first sight. It's the simplest to map too : you put a way with power=line, nodes with power=tower or pole and that's it. Someone who wants to go deeper with concepts can add some extra tags and spend extra hours to design substation material at its discretion. If we let users choose the right tag to use, the underlying question of this thread won't be answered at all, that's my fear. If we look at power=line vs power=cable, there are only 838 ways tagged as cable against 184 554 ways described as power=line. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dcable Correct the wiki will be harder than migrate all these 838 ways to power=line + location=underground. 2013/1/15 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com Just to be sure, I have consulted my professional electrical engineer colleagues. We agree that there is some space for ambiguity. When one (overground) power line (which is composed of several conductors) goes underground, the power line continues as one or several underground cables, depending on the technical implementation. High-power lines are always implemented underground as several cables with every cable carrying one conductor, as seems to be shown in the example picture https://lh3.ggpht.com/-CnkQkGiPmbs/UFM6M2N0lUI/Ark/IMZxA3i6SmY/s1600/tunnel.png My conclusion: I would simply suggest to accept both power=line and power=cable as equivalent. The average mapper is not an electrical engineer after all. Volker -- *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
On 2013-01-15 16:43, Philip Barnes wrote : This may help http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/164648452. Power lines in this case pass through an old railway tunnel. On 2013-01-15 17:06, François Lacombe wrote : Nice example Phil, thanks a lot. My tagging scheme works great with it : power=line + locaion=underground :) 2013/1/15 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Shouldn't the tag be voltage:power=40 ? ;-) No problem I mean : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:voltage OK, must've been a fast train then ;-) railway=disused voltage:railway=40 ;-) In any case, aerial is much more fun http://www.flixxy.com/helicopter-cable-inspector.htm than hiring maintenance moles ;-) But, while I was readjusting what others have left behind, I found a power line, as it's often the case with those long haul mappings (landuse etc...), that was attached to a bike lane (node in common). Imagine catching 24000 V in the pedals ;-) Seriously, isn't there a way to be exempted from having to detach those long haul ways from everything many times a day, and often have to move them to the right place, sometimes 50 m away? Those attached line and lane were crossing at right angle !!! I suppose one does not do that on purpose ! There must be some feature to fix in some editor explaining that. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
On 15/01/2013 15:31, François Lacombe wrote: But aerial line refers to all the conductors transmitting different lives/phases whereas underground power cable, at high voltage, refers to only one phase/conductor. http://www.nexans.no/eservice/Norway-no_NO/fileLibrary/Download_540199654/Norway/files/Underground_power_cables.pdf *So, many underground cables are needed to set up a line!* You may have multi-conductors cables up to 150 kV but you still have several conductors. Insulation is mandatory underground because we can't put enough space between conductors, instead of what is done in the air. The right question is *do we map cables separately or lines*? It's all about the vocabulary we use. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CnkQkGiPmbs/UFM6M2N0lUI/Ark/IMZxA3i6SmY/s1600/tunnel.png If we map cables we must do the same for both aerial and underground lines and I'm not sure it would be really efficient. Well, I think we need to properly define what is meant by power=cable. The wiki page isn't entirely clear on that matter. I'm usually mapping a underground cable connection as a single way tagged as power=cable and indicating the number of physical cables with cables=* (if it is known to me). Your interpretation is obviously that each physical cable should be mapped as power=cable (which you can't if you don't know the number of cables). Considering that power=line and power=cable are used so extensively I think it is a bad idea to redefine the meaning of them as it would break a lot of things and confuse mappers. The distinction between 'line' for overhead power lines and 'cable' for underground cable connections is easily understandable by the average non-expert mapper. My proposal is to clarify both the 'line' and 'cable' wikis as follows: power=line should represent a connection comprising UN-insulated conductors mounted on towers or other supporting structures, normally over ground. power=cable should represent a connection consisting of one or more insulated cables (whether underground, underwater, in a tunnel or overground). The number of physical cables for a cable connection should be indicated by cables=* when known. I'm currently drafting a wiki page for a circuits tag to describe the number of electrical circuits, especially useful for cable connections having an unknown number of cables, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:circuits. Ole ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
On 15/01/2013 19:29, A.Pirard.Papou wrote: But, while I was readjusting what others have left behind, I found a power line, as it's often the case with those long haul mappings (landuse etc...), that was attached to a bike lane (node in common). Imagine catching 24000 V in the pedals ;-) Seriously, isn't there a way to be exempted from having to detach those long haul ways from everything many times a day, and often have to move them to the right place, sometimes 50 m away? It's clearly wrong to connect power lines to highways, landuse etc. Maybe you could try to find out if it is a particular mapper in your area doing this and contact him. Those attached line and lane were crossing at right angle !!! I suppose one does not do that on purpose ! There must be some feature to fix in some editor explaining that. The 'snap-to' function in JOSM sometimes causes such accidents if you are not careful but I suspect many of those spurious connections are caused by mappers using Potlatch. Ole ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
2013/1/15 Ole Nielsen on-...@xs4all.nl Well, I think we need to properly define what is meant by power=cable. The wiki page isn't entirely clear on that matter. I'm usually mapping a underground cable connection as a single way tagged as power=cable and indicating the number of physical cables with cables=* (if it is known to me). I'm totally aware of that. But it doesn't explain why we have to represent two equals things with two different names and two different concepts. Tags intend to describe reality, not transform data as mappers want it to appear. Your interpretation is obviously that each physical cable should be mapped as power=cable (which you can't if you don't know the number of cables). No. I tried to imagine what we would have to do if we were using cable at its right signification. It's not what I propose. Considering that power=line and power=cable are used so extensively I think it is a bad idea to redefine the meaning of them as it would break a lot of things and confuse mappers. The distinction between 'line' for overhead power lines and 'cable' for underground cable connections is easily understandable by the average non-expert mapper. It's a point of view. There are some ways still described with deprecated tags like power=underground_cable. They must be modified to conform to current model. Don't break users implementation is not a good reason to keep deprecated implementation with no limit of time. *If users want a stable data-set, they download an extract of planet.* My proposal is to clarify both the 'line' and 'cable' wikis as follows: power=line should represent a connection comprising UN-insulated conductors mounted on towers or other supporting structures, normally over ground. power=cable should represent a connection consisting of one or more insulated cables (whether underground, underwater, in a tunnel or overground). But there are some places where non-insulated cables are installed indoor, like in bridges or even in some dedicated tunnels (like it seems to be in the Philip Barnes' example). So what would be the tagging scheme here? power=line (non insulated cables) or power=cable (indoor case)? It don't make great sense. Ideally, multi-dimensional tagging must be made by association of several mono-dimensional range of values. We have power=line, power=minor_line, etc... but it can't give the location, which must be defined by another tag. The number of physical cables for a cable connection should be indicated by cables=* when known. I'm currently drafting a wiki page for a circuits tag to describe the number of electrical circuits, especially useful for cable connections having an unknown number of cables, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/Key:circuitshttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:circuits . And I totally agree with you on this side of the tagging scheme :) Regards. -- *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] year in opening_hours syntax
i'm looking an application where having year in the opening_hours syntax would be useful, not directly in opening hours but for a conditional access restriction. the use case would be that known road closures could be placed in advance, and routing/GPS software that could handle it would be able to generate alternate routes depending on the time. there is a genuine application for it in front of me right now; i'm working on a project that includes GPS for emergency responders, and they would very much like to have such a capability. yes, it would lead to old closures scattered about the database, but there are ways of dealing with that. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30
From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 40, Issue 30 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:52:42 + 5. Re: Powerlines underground (Fran?ois Lacombe) Hi Guys, since I had the wrong impression, it looks like were tagging underground powerlines. How do we recognize the connections between the sations ? Or is the data added by external sources as mentioned ? But something else crossed my mind. What do we do with the other underground transport systems, like oil (sometimes secret military lines) natural or industrial gas and waste and drinking water ? I search for it but no WIKI solution IMHO.Greetz ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] cycleway Tagging and Wiki-Page
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Balgofil balgo...@gmx.net wrote: So one solution that was pointed out in the thread is to tag the Schutzstreifen with cycleway=shared_lane because of the description in the wiki. I then pointed out, that in the UK there is a similar situation, but no solution to it (see [2] Limitations). But I don't know what is meant with cycleway=shared_lane. So can someone specify what is meant by this tag? Judging from the description, shared_lane means that there are bike markings on the side of the road, but no full lane. We have something like that here: usually a bike symbol with a metre or so of dotted line next to it. My solution would be to tag a Radfahrstreifen with cycleway=lane AND cycleway:bicycle=designated and a Schutzstreifen with cycleway=lane AND cycleway:bicycle=designated. But this will break backward-compatibility. I take it you meant: Radfahrstreifen: cycleway=lane, cycleway:bicycle=designated Schutzstreifen: cycleway=lane, cycleway:bicycle=yes That seems sensible, and follows all the existing semantics. What backward-compatibility does it break? In the wiki there is also a tag for sharrows. But the description starts with As shared_lane, Does that mean that sharrows are tagged with cycleway=shared_lane, or is cycleway=sharrow the tag describing the markings on the road? The English is a bit unclear. As shared_lane... here means Used the same way as shared_lane. This seems like a pretty dumb tag: cycleway=sharrow has exactly the same meaning and function as cycleway=shared_lane except the marking on the ground happens to look like a chevron. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:23:55 -0500 From: nerou...@gmail.com CC: st.nikl...@live.nl Subject: Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30 Hi,Thanks, I didnt use the right key word to see the tags. But the way of a underground line remains secret to most of us if the data isnt backup by extrenals. I doubt to draw a powerline straight between to substations !Greetz ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground
2013/1/15 Ole Nielsen on-...@xs4all.nl: The 'snap-to' function in JOSM sometimes causes such accidents if you are not careful but I suspect many of those spurious connections are caused by mappers using Potlatch. btw.: you can temporarily disable snapping by holding ctrl cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
