Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
Good point James, We just have to use tower:type=power;communication;whatever for these situations. *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2013/8/28 James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com But what if the pole has both telephone and power on it? ;) That's what's common here in my neighborhood. I can look out my front door and see a pole with both of them using it. -James -- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:05:38 +0200 From: francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map) 2013/8/27 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com We have already trouble with the power line system which gets reconstructed at the moment but a similar system for telephone can work. Please try to avoid mistakes like tagging the poles not man_made=pole but under the telephone namespace. cu For power systems, man_made=power_tower and man_made=power_pole are currently proposed here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_transmission_refinement We can immagine man_made=telecommunication_pole if needed. But I'm also attracted by: * man_made=pole + pole:type=telecommunication which would lead us to edit the power proposal with : * man_made=tower + tower:type=power * man_made=pole + pole:type=power *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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:35 AM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote: But what if the pole has both telephone and power on it? ;) That's what's common here in my neighborhood. I can look out my front door and see a pole with both of them using it. For that, I'd suggest man_made=pole with power=yes and telephone=yes, or something like that (maybe communication instead of telephone, as telephone lines are also used for ADSL etc). Really I'd prefer a top-level tag utility=* e.g. utility=pole, as I think that's a distinct domain like leisure, amenity and so on, but I think it's probably a bit late for that, and man_made is probably the best existing tag to include them in. __John ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
2013/8/28 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com For that, I'd suggest man_made=pole with power=yes and telephone=yes, or something like that (maybe communication instead of telephone, as telephone lines are also used for ADSL etc). I don't think every single node has to get these attributes, it should be sufficient to tag the ways (or relations that use these ways). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
+1 Martin, it would make the model simpler. * man_made=tower + tower:type=utility * man_made=pole I don't think there something smaller, do you ? *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2013/8/28 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2013/8/28 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com For that, I'd suggest man_made=pole with power=yes and telephone=yes, or something like that (maybe communication instead of telephone, as telephone lines are also used for ADSL etc). I don't think every single node has to get these attributes, it should be sufficient to tag the ways (or relations that use these ways). 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] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
How about a lightweight version of this, for the rather common situation where the power infrastructure follows the roads, and the mapping won't be detailed due to lack of micro-mapping energy? Think miles and miles of rural highway... are you planning to trace each road? Can't you map a lot more power, if you can leverage the road geometry? We have lots of geometry that follows roads: sidewalks, bike lanes, cycleways, contraflow cycleways, kerbs. Why not power? highway=tertiary overhead_wires:left=*CATV;phone;power;fibre;tin-can-strings* Or even: highway=tertiary associated_utility_cabling=[*overhead/underground/none/unknown*] associated_utility_cabling:type=* CATV;phone;power;fibre;tin-can-strings;power_trunk;power_regional;power_distribution * if someone later wants to come along and map each pole, wire and bird nest, no problem! * But the first level approximation is are there a lot of wires running overhead or not? * Only when the power lines diverge from roads is a separate way strictly necessary. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
Il giorno 28/ago/2013, alle ore 20:15, François Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu ha scritto: +1 Martin, it would make the model simpler. * man_made=tower + tower:type=utility * man_made=pole I don't think there something smaller, do you ? I'd not use man_made tower for power towers, no need to pull them all there. Something smaller you can find in my garden ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
Il giorno 28/ago/2013, alle ore 20:34, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com ha scritto: We have lots of geometry that follows roads: sidewalks, bike lanes, cycleways, contraflow cycleways, kerbs. Why not power? I can follow your argument (who's gonna do all that dumb work of tracing power lines in large rural areas like in the US), but it is preferable to have a distinct object for what is really something different in the real world. Otherwise you either get long, ugly and error prone tags and tag lists on the object or you risk of not knowing any more to which implicit object a tag refers to (e.g. name, ref, operator, Wikipedia etc). That's why I suggest to preferably create dedicated geometry and preliminary (the quick way) reuse the road geometry with relations (e.g. route=power_transmission) to get a proper object instead of adding the power tags on the road object. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
2013/8/28 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com I'd not use man_made tower for power towers, no need to pull them all there. We don't want to pull power towers in man_made from power=* power=tower isn't proposed for deprecation yet. The fact is we need power=* for other features which can be found on the same node as the tower. Since the subject of this thread is to find a tag for telecommunication poles, the better we can do is to find a solution to map both power and communication towers/poles or more generally all utility poles/towers. = These poles may often be shared between power and communication. *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] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Il giorno 28/ago/2013, alle ore 20:34, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com ha scritto: We have lots of geometry that follows roads: sidewalks, bike lanes, cycleways, contraflow cycleways, kerbs. Why not power? I can follow your argument (who's gonna do all that dumb work of tracing power lines in large rural areas like in the US), but it is preferable to have a distinct object for what is really something different in the real world. It sort of depends on your point of view. If that centerline represents the *road corridor*, then attributes of the road corridor seem fair game. * It's a paved 2 lane highway, with a narrow shoulder, 55 mph, bikes prohibited, hgv allowed, with overhead utilities* The moment you begin breaking things out and recording actual geometry that model starts to break down... but that's OK. If anyone wants to map to that level, they just need to remove the more general tagging. Full editor support would flag the road attribute tags, if you draw a utility line nearby (do you want to remove this style of tagging?). highway=residental utilities=overhead lanes=2 For other areas we could get a high percentage of the utility with a fraction of the effort... ... and reduce hours of pain fixing newbie mistakes where roads were moved outside of their utility line contexts. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
underground is an attribute in local government databases of roads around here: for earthquake purposes the major arterial routes have priority for utility undergrounding. Thus it it even possible to robottag huge swathes, subject to the usual concerns about robotagging. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
I recently found that a way I'd marked as a minor power line (from Bing) is actually a telephone line (from survey), which we seem to have a convention of not mapping. Should I just delete it, or tag it just so that no-one else seeing it on Bing will map it as a power line in the future? More generally, should we tag things that we don't normally map, that on aerials can be confused for things that we do map, to avoid spurious mapping by others? (In this case, I should have been able to recognize it as a phone line, by the layout of the area.) __John ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
More generally, should we tag things that we don't normally map, that There's no such existing thing as we don't normally map. People map what is of interest to them. Just use a tag that doesn't already mean something different. FWIW, I've used aerial_line=telephone for such telephone lines on poles. There could something more popular, but I didn't find it. -- alv ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi wrote: People map what is of interest to them. Just use a tag that doesn't already mean something different. Threre is also people who doesn't want mapbesity or overload of details when they want to edit the map like mapping every leaf of every tree, even with the right tag. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On 27.08.2013 16:19, Pieren wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi wrote: People map what is of interest to them. Just use a tag that doesn't already mean something different. Threre is also people who doesn't want mapbesity or overload of details when they want to edit the map like mapping every leaf of every tree, even with the right tag. +1 but poles and telephone lines are by far comparable with tagging every tree in the park/woods. We have already trouble with the power line system which gets reconstructed at the moment but a similar system for telephone can work. Please try to avoid mistakes like tagging the poles not man_made=pole but under the telephone namespace. cu fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi wrote: People map what is of interest to them. Just use a tag that doesn't already mean something different. Threre is also people who doesn't want mapbesity or overload of details when they want to edit the map like mapping every leaf of every tree, even with the right tag. Yes, I'm specifically avoiding suggesting that we routinely map telephone lines (they are very common in some places, and probably rather hard to map consistently from aerials, compared with power lines). I'm just concerned with what to do with things that have been tagged incorrectly once, and, if simply deleted, might be re-mapped incorrectly again; in this case, leaving a reminder effectively saying this is not a power line although it looks like one on Bing. __John ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
2013/8/27 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com We have already trouble with the power line system which gets reconstructed at the moment but a similar system for telephone can work. Please try to avoid mistakes like tagging the poles not man_made=pole but under the telephone namespace. cu For power systems, man_made=power_tower and man_made=power_pole are currently proposed here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_transmission_refinement We can immagine man_made=telecommunication_pole if needed. But I'm also attracted by: * man_made=pole + pole:type=telecommunication which would lead us to edit the power proposal with : * man_made=tower + tower:type=power * man_made=pole + pole:type=power *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] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
But what if the pole has both telephone and power on it? ;) That's what's common here in my neighborhood. I can look out my front door and see a pole with both of them using it. -James Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:05:38 +0200 From: francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map) 2013/8/27 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com We have already trouble with the power line system which gets reconstructed at the moment but a similar system for telephone can work. Please try to avoid mistakes like tagging the poles not man_made=pole but under the telephone namespace. cu For power systems, man_made=power_tower and man_made=power_pole are currently proposed here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_transmission_refinement We can immagine man_made=telecommunication_pole if needed. But I'm also attracted by: * man_made=pole + pole:type=telecommunication which would lead us to edit the power proposal with : * man_made=tower + tower:type=power * man_made=pole + pole:type=power 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] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
Yes, I'm specifically avoiding suggesting that we routinely map telephone lines (they are very common in some places, and probably rather hard to map consistently from aerials, compared with power lines). In this area it would be far easier to tag the three or four roads that don't have power / phone / cable TV lines. The poles follow the road geometry directly. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:35 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.comwrote: But what if the pole has both telephone and power on it? ;) That's what's common here in my neighborhood. I can look out my front door and see a pole with both of them using it. And of course cable tv and fiber are strung on many utilities poles as well. Power and communications lines should be separated. According to wikipedia, a better term is utility pole. Especially when the pole carries both power and communication lines. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
