Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Hello, Le lun. 21 nov. 2022 à 08:15, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Some offices are involved in the sale and administration of the utility. > It's true, and not in operation. utility=* was designed with technical stuff in mind and it would not cause so much harm to extend it to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Nov 20, 2022, at 3:47 PM, François Lacombe wrote: > utility=* key is already widely used and expect one single value, in every > situation. While I regret not doing simple wiki research that would have revealed a collision with my “out loud imagining” clearly-stated to be just that (an

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On 21/11/22 10:47, François Lacombe wrote: Good evening, Le dim. 20 nov. 2022 à 17:36, stevea a écrit : In fact, I can imagine a variety of tags that describe much (approaching or even achieving?) all of this: office=utility utility=water;sewer;garbage

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Good evening, Le dim. 20 nov. 2022 à 17:36, stevea a écrit : > In fact, I can imagine a variety of tags that describe much (approaching > or even achieving?) all of this: > office=utility > utility=water;sewer;garbage > utility=accepts_payment > > utility=cable_tv >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 02:36, stevea wrote: > this missive attempts to sketch the outline of a possible tagging scheme > for “utilities” in general. This would be a fairly rich (complex) scheme > if/as it were to encompass all of the sorts of “utility offices” there are > around the world. It

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Nov 20, 2022, at 1:22 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Technically energy = power x time, so related things but not the same. Thank you; that’s the simple answer to clear up any potentially remaining confusion. Whether it does or not... > Utilities would not only be energy/power

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On 20/11/22 10:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 18 Nov 2022, at 22:35, Mike Thompson wrote: In a nearby city to where I live, the city owned utility provides electricity, water, sewer, and internet. yes, it is also common in areas I know to have a single provider for

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 08:52:45 +0200, Dimitar wrote: > > What evidence do you have that is the case?  What is being provided is > > energy, not power. > > From Cambridge dictionary: > energy - the power from something such as electricity or oil that can do > work, such as providing light and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sent from a phone > On 18 Nov 2022, at 22:56, Mike Thompson wrote: > >> Energy and power are used quite interchangeably and power is the better word >> for it. >> > > What evidence do you have that is the case? What is being provided is > energy, not power. maybe we can agree they

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sent from a phone > On 18 Nov 2022, at 22:35, Mike Thompson wrote: > > In a nearby city to where I live, the city owned utility provides > electricity, water, sewer, and internet. yes, it is also common in areas I know to have a single provider for water, sewer, waste disposal and even

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:45:58PM +0200, Dimitar wrote: > Energy and power are used quite interchangeably and power is the better word > for it. That is just plain wrong. They have different dimensions. ael ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

> What evidence do you have that is the case?  What is being provided is energy, not power. From Cambridge dictionary: power - electricity, especially when considering its use or production energy - the power from something such as electricity or oil that can do work, such as providing light

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 3:05 PM Matija Nalis < mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr> wrote: > > Also, if being advanced consumer with higher power limits, you ALSO (in > addition to > two things above) have to pay for reactive power too, according to > cos(phi) > (beware of those inductive loads

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 at 08:05, Matija Nalis < mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr> wrote: > > However, "energy company" is not restricted to electrical energy. > Over here in Croatia, another popular energent is natural gas. > > In fact, many of "electrical energy providers" are also > "natural

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 14:31:42 -0700, Mike Thompson wrote: > Technically what the electric utility is selling is energy, not power. One > gets billed for kilowatt-hours, not kilowatts. Well, it depends on the country. Over here in Croatia, you have to pay for max power too (by choosing which

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 2:46 PM Dimitar wrote: > Energy and power are used quite interchangeably and power is the better > word for it. > What evidence do you have that is the case? What is being provided is energy, not power. ...and if we mean electricity, why not use that in the tag? > > >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Energy and power are used quite interchangeably and power is the better word for it. > A more general issue is that often utilities provide more than one service.  Xcel, which operates in parts of the US, provides both electricity and natural gas (the latter which is technically energy too). 

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Technically what the electric utility is selling is energy, not power. One gets billed for kilowatt-hours, not kilowatts. See [0]. However, colloquially, the terms power and energy when it comes to electric utilities are used interchangeably, although "power company" seems to be favored vs.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Regarding deprecation of old tags, please follow this Discourse thread too: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/changing-rfc-time-for-proposals-including-deprecation/5661 On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 22:04:59 +0200, Dimitar wrote: > Link to the community forum thread: >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Link to the community forum thread: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/feature-proposal-rfc-power-utility-offices/5659 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sent from a phone Am 04.11.2015 um 07:16 schrieb John Willis : >> The network is ran/owned by a government institution, the actual power >> distribution by commercial providers. So when you want a contract to get >> electricity you go to a commercial entity. So building=civic

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sent from a phone > Am 04.11.2015 um 07:22 schrieb Gerd Petermann > : > > E.ON,RWE,Vattenfall and EnBW. > I am sure there are offices somewhere, but probably not for the public. > of course there are, at least in the big cities... cheers Martin

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 09:14 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office sent from a phone Am 04.11.2015 um 07:22 schrieb Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hot

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

> On Nov 4, 2015, at 5:12 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > The building tag is about the building itself, That is a good point. I don't want to throw all this in amenity. It isn't a shop... Office=*. ? I always assume that a building at this level is usually

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

2015-11-04 9:49 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann : > I would not call that an office, EWE calls it "EWE ServicePunkt" > > well. then call it a shop or an amenity. Banks for instance are amenities in OSM. You are right that "office" is typically used for back offices

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

> On Nov 4, 2015, at 6:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > while front facing offices often get the shop tag. Most offices that provide customer service for existing services or billing resolution don't seem like a shop. If the role for shop=* is so expansive,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

2015-11-04 10:00 GMT+01:00 John Willis : > > That is a good point. I don't want to throw all this in amenity. > why not? There's still room ;-) > > It isn't a shop... > > Office=*. ? maybe we should distinguish between amenity (open to the public) and office (no public

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Would be fine to me and I'd prefer this to the current sparse situation and it really would make it much more coherent. When I was looking for the proper tagging for power utilities common sense directed me to the key power (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power) of for the water (

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

Would you still use building=civic for power utility offices when it's a commercial company ? The power distribution in Belgium is complex. The network is ran/owned by a government institution, the actual power distribution by commercial providers. So when you want a contract to get electricity

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

> On Nov 4, 2015, at 2:46 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > > The network is ran/owned by a government institution, the actual power > distribution by commercial providers. So when you want a contract to get > electricity you go to a commercial entity. So building=civic is not

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

there are offices somewhere, but probably not for the public. Gerd Von: Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 06:46 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office Wou

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:42 AM, johnw wrote: > I wanted a landuse=civic (or similar) to go with building=civic - and have > a civic=* subkey to define all the various governmental and civic offices. > (townhalls, community centeres, tax offices, water district offices, etc. I

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

The tag has already been used a few times (there was four tags in different places of the world) see it here https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/office=power_utility#overview, Its counterpart, the water_utility has 35 ocurrences in the map

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

> On Nov 3, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Joan wrote: > > The tag has already been used a few times (there was four tags in different > places of the world) see it here > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/office=power_utility#overview >