<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>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?<br>
    </p>
    <p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity</a></p>
    <p>Regards, Lukas<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/11/2020 22:07, Lukas Richert
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:39e5f957-1870-cd12-381f-9828bd79eeca@posteo.de">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <p>I also think the <b>electricity:grid=yes/no/backup</b> and <b>electricity:generator=yes/no/backup</b>
        tags are clearer and would allow for off-grid buildings to be
        tagged more distinctly. <br>
      </p>
      <p>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. )</p>
      <p>What do others think about the tag options</p>
      <blockquote>electricity:grid=yes/no/backup<br>
        electricity:generator=yes/no/backup<br>
        electricity=yes                                               <br>
        electricity=no<br>
      </blockquote>
      <p>[electricity=yes would be used when grid or generator is
        unknown] instead of <br>
      </p>
      <blockquote>
        <p>electricity=grid<br>
          electricity=generator<br>
          electricity=yes<br>
          electricity=no</p>
      </blockquote>
      <p>Cheers Lukas<br>
      </p>
      <p><br>
      </p>
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/11/2020 21:20, Andrew Harvey
        wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAD5VjstVd1UmaRoXfD4qBhh9F21ra9YK05sBWdn6KRcqRM-C6A@mail.gmail.com">
        <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
          charset=UTF-8">
        <div dir="ltr">
          <div dir="ltr"><br>
          </div>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at
              00:13, Lukas Richert <<a
                href="mailto:lrichert@posteo.de" moz-do-not-send="true">lrichert@posteo.de</a>>
              wrote:<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <p>Hi,</p>
                <p>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 <b>offgrid</b> as a building that has, for
                  example, a grid connection with solar panels on the
                  roof would then be tagged as <b>electricity=grid;offgrid</b>
                  instead of <b>electricity=grid;generator</b>. The
                  former is illogical. <br>
                </p>
                <p>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?<br>
                </p>
                <p>A further suggestion was to change the tagging to<b>
                  </b><b>electricity:grid=yes/no/backup</b> and/or <b>electricity:generator=yes/no/backup</b>.
                  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 <b>electricity:generator:origin=diesel</b>
                  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 <b>electricity=none</b> tag which should
                  probably be changed directly to <b>electricity=no.</b> </p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Here is the link to that suggestion I made <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values"
                moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values</a> and <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources"
                moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources</a></div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>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.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>