The tagging from the original proposal has now changed significantly in
the past weeks and, I think, has gotten more robust and modular. It has,
however, then lost backwards compatability although the tag was not used
often and it should be straightforward to migrate the tags to the new
scheme. I'd be happy to hear more feedback on the proposal as it
currently stands. Otherwise, if discussion concludes this week I would
then move on to voting next week.
Cheers, Lukas
On 05/11/2020 15:32, Lukas Richert wrote:
I have now switched over the tagging and examples to the namespace
based tagging of grid and generator. Overall, this makes it easier and
clearer to tag backup generators and grid-connected houses with solar
panels etc IMO. Perhaps it would also be possible to then tag
electricity:grid=yes and electricity=no in the case of grid connected
houses experiencing a long-term power outage during a natural disaster?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity
Regards, Lukas
On 03/11/2020 22:07, Lukas Richert wrote:
I also think the *electricity:grid=yes/no/backup* and
*electricity:generator=yes/no/backup* tags are clearer and would
allow for off-grid buildings to be tagged more distinctly.
The electricity tag isn't used a lot yet. I have no experience with
automated or semi-automated edits, but perhaps changing
electricity=none and electricity=grid to electricity:grid=yes would
be relatively straightforward? (This is unfortunately the problem
with people adding major undiscussed/proposed tags to the main wiki.
Especially power_supply is frustrating. )
What do others think about the tag options
electricity:grid=yes/no/backup
electricity:generator=yes/no/backup
electricity=yes
electricity=no
[electricity=yes would be used when grid or generator is unknown]
instead of
electricity=grid
electricity=generator
electricity=yes
electricity=no
Cheers Lukas
On 03/11/2020 21:20, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 00:13, Lukas Richert <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi,
While the original proposal did specify that generators are
usually diesel, broadening the definition would only lead to a
loss of detail, but the tagging would still be correct. I'm
hesitant to use *offgrid* as a building that has, for example, a
grid connection with solar panels on the roof would then be
tagged as *electricity=grid;offgrid* instead of
*electricity=grid;generator*. The former is illogical.
However, I don't have any experience in developing countries: is
it easier to verify if something is off-grid compared to if it
is connected to a generator? And, would it be necessary to
differentiate between local grids (i.e. 2-3 generators, no
substations, transfromers, etc.) and national grids? Perhaps
then a network tag would be useful, i.e. network=national,
local, regional similar to the way cycle networks are mapped?
A further suggestion was to change the tagging
to***electricity:grid=yes/no/backup* and/or
*electricity:generator=yes/no/backup*. This might be less
ambiguous for tagging amenities or buildings that get
electricity from both sources and would then be more consistent
with tagging such as *electricity:generator:origin=diesel* when,
e.g. a building has a backup diesel generator but is connected
to the grid. Unfortunately, it would then not be consistent with
the use by the Healthsites Mapping Project, although this
already has the inconsistent *electricity=none* tag which should
probably be changed directly to *electricity=no.*
Here is the link to that suggestion I made
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values> and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources>
The whole point of the proposal process is to identify these
potential issues, resolve them, and get community agreement. If the
goal is just to implement someone else's standard then we can't use
the wisdom of the community here to improve the tag, therefore I'm
not too fussed about making this match what another project is
using, instead we should aim to have the best tags and documentation
as the outcome of this proposal process. Then if that's different,
other projects closely tied to OSM can migrate to the OSM community
accepted schema.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
