Why can a drilled rock tunnel, or an aqueduct for that matter, not be part of a pipeline? Are you just saying it is unlikely, or do you mean that it would no longer be called a pipeline if part of its distance is drilled through rock instead of being a steel pipe? According to this article that is possible:
http://www.muehlhan.com/index.php/en/markets-and-references/bridges-pipelines/penstock "Penstock" indicates the function, not a means of construction. I think the sentence "Modern aqueducts may also use pipelines" might be better rephrased as "Modern aqueducts may carry the (water) in pipes instead of the traditional open channels." --colin On 2015-10-09 18:27, François Lacombe wrote: > According to this wikipedia article : NYC Water supply > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_water_supply_system > > I see many terms to talk about Catskill Aqueduct which is a major part > of this system : aquduct, conduit, tunnel, siphon... but pipeline is > never used. > Google tells nothing about Catskill pipeline but has many results > regarding Catskill aqueduct. > > Again here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqueduct_%28water_supply%29 > I think the sentence "Modern aqueducts may also use pipelines", which > sounds like "An aqueduct is not always a pipeline". > > I agree with Colin : a pipeline is a route, but won't be composed of > bare rock drilled tunnels. > > The waterway=penstock should exist on the wiki to summarize all this > interesting discussion. > > All the best > François Lacombe > > fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com > www.infos-reseaux.com [1] > @InfosReseaux > > 2015-10-09 17:40 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>: > >> I see a pipeline as analogous to a route, i.e. from one place to another, >> made up of many contiguous segments of varying types. Many of these segments >> may be (steel) pipes, but they may also be drilled through rock or whatever. >> A penstock is a particular function of certain pipelines, for example from >> high up to the turbine hall. This pipeline can be made of all kinds of >> segments, just like all other pipelines. >> >> //colin >> >> On 2015-10-09 16:59, François Lacombe wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> 2015-10-07 1:02 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: >> >> I'd like to think anything carrying waste water (sewer) would have a non >> permeable lining.. and that lining could be called a 'pipe' and thus it is a >> 'pipeline'. >> >> To me the 'tubes' in my house for carrying water/gas are pipes .. and as >> they are a line then they are pipelines! >> >> I'd like to consider the pipeline is almost replacable by its operator. >> A tunnel, furthermore when it's shielded, carrying water isn't >> replacable at all and its components aren't pipes at all. >> >> Digging rock to get a tunnel is a lot heavier than installing a >> pipeline. It doesn't have the same environmental footprint too. >> >> Ok to say that sewerage facilities are almost pipelines, but >> sometimes, they are drains or tunnel. >> >> 2015-10-09 16:28 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt <bry...@obviously.com>: >> >> The problem with man_made + waterway on the same node, is both are top level >> tags. >> Here you'd want a refinement tag for pipeline. >> >> I prefer to say that both man_made=pipeline and waterway=* can be >> standalone to have a meaning instead of the "top level" expression. >> >> The extension I propose (I'm not refining any existing values here) >> isn't only focused on pipeline but on tunnels too. >> Due to the reasons we talked this week it shouldn't only concern pipelines. >> >> -- >> >> There are two valid but separate goals to keep in mind. Are you mapping >> the: >> * Visible surface features >> * The flow of material >> >> Both are valid mapping goals. For mapping the flow you want a continuous >> link of >> tags that imply water flow. That penstock comes from a reservoir or weir, >> passes through a generating station, and exits into a canal which dumps into >> a river >> or a sink. That flow could be one way or in the case of storage reservoirs >> two ways (pumped >> uphill at low demand times). >> >> Equally valid is mapping the surface expression only. Those are pipes >> sticking up out of the ground (a man made feature). >> >> I would like to map the visible surface features : man_made=pipeline >> ONLY when the penstock is visible and composed of pipes >> AND I would like to map the flow of material with waterway=penstock at >> the same time. >> >> A penstock may be a pipeline but water is always flowing inside isn't it ? >> >> Cheers >> >> François Lacombe >> >> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com >> www.infos-reseaux.com [1] >> @InfosReseaux >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Links: ------ [1] http://www.infos-reseaux.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging