[Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

2018-01-23 14:25 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com>:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:45:18 +0100
> François Lacombe <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > and ease access of water data with the use of existing waterway key
>
> Can you give example of real data consumer(s) where it will improve
> situation?
>
> From somebody making maps from OSM data - it will make situation worse for
> me,
> not better (even more waterway values to handle).
>

To get the whole hydrographic system, users have to query waterway,
pipeline and some other keys not all related to water.
If all water paths would have only waterway=*, this would be simpler and
sustainable.
Would you be happy if I remove highway=* from tunnels or bridges just
because it's not "natural" roads?

Not to mention standard osm render doesn't currently render pipelines.
Introducing a new value of waterway, already imported in mapnik schema may
be simpler than adding pipeline and some extra keys.


> As data consumer I would prefer to have general tags - for example, in my
> data processing I would prefer to have
> spillways mapped as waterway=canal + intermittent=yes rather than
> waterway=spillway.
>

But it's not what an actual canal is !
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Grand_Union_Canal.jpg
How many fake canals are mapped right now just because mappers don't find a
more suitable value ?


> Also I would prefer waterway=canal + pressurised=yes + tunnel=* rather
> than waterway=pressurised.
>
> In general, in OSM data processing where I participate and waterway
> values are used I would prefer to avoid fragmentation of waterway tag
> values.
>

I find this inconsistent after adding many man_made values (like dams,
weir... not directly referring to water) in waterway key.
I'm proposing to make it more consistent precisely regarding water


> I know that what I am doing is a tiny subset of what can be done with OSM
> but I am curious of what is the source of claims that new scheme will be
> better.
>

Regarding my particular situation too, i'm a data scientist in an industry
oriented software developper team.
OSM data become more and more valuable for us. It would be a lot more if
words were used according to their actual meaning.
As an individual contributor, i find some keys really messy and spend a
great time trying to improve this.

As said on wiki page, having a new value in an established key is an
opportunity to write a better documentation, stop awkward usage and build
more comprehensive preset handling in editor.
It's not all about the data itself but its collection and ideas exposed to
contributors.

2018-01-23 14:43 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
> +1 for this, as I can imagine pressurised waterways appearing in any
size, so making pressurised an attribute could make sense.

Context is more important than size to pressure water.

waterway=canal sounds to be dedicated to open air man made built to divert
water for a particular purpose.
Don't you find waterway=canal + pressurised=yes inconsistent since canal is
open air channel?

Introduce waterway=pressurised prevent its irrelevant use with other
incompatible waterway values.


François
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180123/90601c79/attachment-0001.html>