I have reworked the proposal
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity to
include the separation of the source tag and a further example including
battery storage.
To avoid confusion, I have decided to keep the secondary namespace in
the source tags even though they are somewhat redundant. Although in the
case of the Shoals Laboratory, something like grid:input would make
sense as well since the grid is well-defined!
Are there any further comments or undiscussed problems?
Regards
Lukas
On 15.11.20 19:37, François Lacombe wrote:
Hi Lukas,
Le dim. 15 nov. 2020 à 02:46, Lukas Richert <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
Hi,
I was actually thinking of the type of battery, i.e. flywheel,
LiOn, etc. Although it would probably also be interesting to
figure out a tagging scheme to classify batteries by type,
capacity etc. for the future.
That's a good topic
However be careful to not extend the proposal too much. Classification
of batteries would deserve a dedicated document and vote.
And it's true that :grid, :generator, and :battery as second
namespaces are redundant if the source keys can be restricted to
only being usable if the corresponding infrastructure key is used.
Great
The only issue I see with separating the tagging like this if the
general source of electricity is advertised (e.g. 'renewable' in a
supermarket and you can't determine if that's because they're
connected to the grid or they have a small wind turbine out
back..rather unlikely but still). I think that it's likely easy to
tell or would also be advertised if they had a local generator. Or
perhaps would then have to be left untagged.
If such a situation occurs, you'll have to tag both grid and
generator with two separate tags.
If you'd like to add such a table to the wiki, feel free! :)
I'll take time to do so shortly
All the best
François
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
