[Tagging] Power tower and pole usefulness

fly lowflight66 at googlemail.com
Sun Sep 22 13:14:07 UTC 2013


+1 using man_made=tower for all towers

Lets show that we are flexible enough and not that conservative to fix
mistakes even if they were made some years ago and if the are right now
an established method.

Am 21.09.2013 21:16, schrieb Ole Nielsen:
> On 21/09/2013 21:01, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> I continue to oppose the usage of man_made=tower for electricity lattice
>> towers (that what has been power=tower until now and which is 4,8
>> Million times in use). Why should we change this well established
>> practise, which would require 4,8 Million new additional tags
>> (tower:type=electricity) and which doesn't even help to reduce potential
>> multivalue conflicts? At least I'd use man_made=power_tower or something
>> similar, but IMHO if there are problems with power=tower having other
>> infrastructure on them this should be dealt with in an alternative way
>> possibly keeping power=tower.

I do not understand why this would not help ?
tower:type=electricity does not but actual we need a tag which describes
that the tower supports cables. "cable_support" ?

The problem mentioned within this thread is that we have two proposals
for tower tagging which contradict as one uses tower:type to describe
the use and the other uses it to describe the construction/material.

If you look at the external presets for JOSM you will find two different
presets for tower + the internal one.

On the wiki page tower:construction is also mentioned, which might be a
way to go.

Well, think we need to work on man_made=tower/pole anyway.


> And we will loose the elegant ability to retrieve all power features
> just by using a power=* query in Overpass.

Well, you will not find poles and towers without connection but adopting
your query should not be that hard.


fly



More information about the Tagging mailing list