[Tagging] Utility corridor mapping

Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0909 at googlemail.com
Thu Sep 5 06:26:35 UTC 2013

The proposed tagging scheme doesn't sound too bad to me.
It's easily expandable for those who want to map more detail


But I would vote for just mapping what is somewhat verifiable on the ground.
(Overhead wires can be seen, water may have signs and plates, sewage may be
verified by canal entry points ...)

You only problem is that you can't distinguish the three possible states

- a street with no utilities present
- a street with no overhead but unknown underground utilities
- an unmapped street

If you just want to specify that there are no overhead lines, you could do

utilities:overhead = no

But this defies the logic given above and may lead to others mapping

utilities:overhead = electricity; communications

which would not be advisable imho.
It may still be an option if documented clearly.

Just my 2 cents,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130905/1e0a6adb/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list