[Tagging] Nuclear Key
pdorange at mac.com
Sun Apr 17 16:19:29 BST 2011
Andreas Hubel <andi at saerdnaer.de> wrote:
> > Building this tool, i also notice that some tag reactor (one tag per
> > reactor) and other tag power plant site (one tag for the power plant).
> Do you have some numbers?
No just lookign aroudn at some power plant in different country.
> I also noticed this when i looked at the local reactor:
> (use data layer)
> the plant site is a way with • barrier: fence • name: Kernkraftwerk
> Gundremmingen • power: generator • power_source: nuclear
> and an additional node • name: Kernkraftwerk Gundremmingen B u. C •
> operator: KKW Gundremmingen GmbH • power: generator • power_rating: 2572
> MW • power_source: nuclear
All depends on detail level or accuracy you want (and all users are
diffrents)... But for my own opinion i don't see individual reactor has
"power generator" there are "reactors". The power generation
(electricity) is related to the site not to individual reactor.
I thougth tagging each reactor has "power=generator" is a mistake. The
site must be tagged 'power=generator' and perhaps can we have another
tag dedicated to indivudual reactor.
Generally a nuclear site (power generator) has some reactors (2, 4 or
more). But all not working, some are definetly stopped (still dangerous
and keep under surveillance), some are in the process of beeing
dismantle (no reactor has been completly dismantle in the world).
Tagging the site as "power=generator" and each reactor inside has
"?=reactor" seems to me a good option.
> i see following options:
> A) remove the node and add tags to site way
This was the best solution for me with the actual scheme (no rector
> B) remove the power tags from the way and the node as it is
No i dont't thing we can assume reactor as power generator.
> C) remove all power tags from the way, delete the node and add the
> according tags to the individual reactor buildings
Would be very complicated, because we usually don't have a detailled
plan of the different activity in each building. And perhaps too precise
for OSM... Tagging the site is the minimum. Tagging reactor can be a
precision Tagging the power station can also be a nice complement But i
dont thing we have to tag other things.
> Additional there would be a ton of additional options by using relations
A relation would be perfect to structure all this elements and can
permit to users to detailled the site has they want/need.
-- Pierre-Alain Dorange OSM experiences :
More information about the Tagging