[Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

Fran├žois Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Wed Feb 14 00:03:22 UTC 2018


 Hi,

2018-02-14 0:51 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>:

> In the diagram
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/thumb/e/e6/Waterway_
> flows.png/500px-Waterway_flows.png
>
> The upper ones may well be man made - so the tags waterway=canal,
> tunnel=yes could be replace by
> man_made=pipeline .. as there should be nothing limiting what a pipe is
> made out of.


A tunnel doesn't sound like a proper pipeline to me

Especially because a pipeline can be hosted in a tunnel.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_pipeline_in_tunnel.png
<http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux>

2018-02-14 0:51 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>:

> OSM unfortunately 'maps what is there' .. not "hardware"/"use".
>

Then it isn't clear to me why we use to tag an underground road with
highway=primary + tunnel=yes
We actually do have well established tagging which separate content from
containers.

I don't get the point about waterway=pressurised.
Is this that bad, or you just don't want ot use it?

Fran├žois
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180214/60bb5666/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list