[Tagging] waterway=penstock to complete pipeline tagging

Colin Smale colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Sun Oct 11 12:14:33 UTC 2015


Hi Francois, 

On 2015-10-11 13:28, François Lacombe wrote: 

> Hi Colin 
> Le 9 oct. 2015 7:26 PM, "Colin Smale" <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> a écrit :
>> Are you just saying it is unlikely, or do you mean that it would no longer be called a pipeline if part of its distance is drilled through rock instead of being a steel pipe? 
> I won't call a drilled rock section a "pipeline".

It is not a PIPE, but it may be part of a PIPELINE (if you accept the
analogy of a pipeline being like a route, chaining many segments

> "Penstock" indicates the function, not a means of construction. 

> And hat's precisely why penstocks shouldn't be restricted to pipelines in OSM ?

I would say, not restricted to PIPES. 

>> I think the sentence "Modern aqueducts may also use pipelines" might be better rephrased as "Modern aqueducts may carry the (water) in pipes instead of the traditional open channels."
> I don't agree since Roman aqueducts weren't completely open but weren't using pipelines too.
> Pipelines are one solution out of many other. Make this diversity persistent in OSM is a good thing IMHO.

The word "may" means "is allowed to." Open or semi-open aqueducts are
still allowed as well. So the definition of aqueduct is "a construction
for guiding flowing water", which is what its latin origins intended. No
part of that word suggests that they have to be open or pipes or

> My point was to find a solution regarding the water flow and not exclusively regarding pipelines. 
> All the best 
> François 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20151011/d23d15d9/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list