On 04/03/2014 17:15, François Lacombe wrote:
2014-03-04 16:35 GMT+01:00 Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org
<mailto:j...@liotier.org>>:
Along railways, motorways, high-voltage lines, riverbeds, roads,
sewers, tunnels... Pretty much every type of right-of-way is used
and the telecom link is part of it. Rarely does the
telecommunications link exist on its own, except as directly
buried cables that exist in rural locations.
I don't agree. "Except in rural location" may concern some important
distance.
Yes, those rural cables buried directly are long ones and therefore
represent a significant share of the network's total length. Opposite
case: sewer-borne cables - short, numerous and urban.
Come on Jean-Marc, @AlertePelleteuz on Twitter wouldn't report so many
optical fibre outage with an efficient and reliable French DICT system.
Indeed there is room for improvement - we are working on it.
As a data producer I can't know what user would be finally interested in.
I see things in my environment and looking for the best way to
legally, responsibly and technically add it to the map.
If you take a major drinking water pipeline such as Aqueduc de l'Avre or
the TRAPIL fuel pipeline network, even though they are buried they are
associated with a surface trail so clearly visible that one may almost
consider setting landuse=pipeline on top of them. They are an important
part of how one may describe their location, even though their main
feature is underground.
In the case of telecommunications infrastructure, I believe that the
issue is visibility. I am convinced that mapping features that are not
visible directly or indirectly is not going to produce data that
Openstreetmap contributors can maintain - and that it should therefore
not be present.
That leaves many telecommunications features that are excellent
Openstreetmap fodder: hosting centers, central offices, street cabinets
- we had those discussions before. But visible cables or cable-bearing
infrastructure are going to be a very rare exception to the norm of
invisibility - better take that into account early to set limited goals
and expectations... Unlike your effort on the electrical network which
is turning out very nicely !
Well... Back on topic...
Let's take inspiration from
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpipeline and propose:
man_made=pipeline
type=telecom
location=underground
operator=*
The German man_made=pipeline page already proposes type=telecom
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:man_made%3Dpipeline
And on the basis of
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:pipeline%3Dmarker you would have:
pipeline=marker
type=telecom
operator=*
ref=*
The key here is to set the hypothesis that you are going to map not
cables but cable paths, which may contain more than one cable - in my
view, that justifies using the pipeline tagging scheme.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
