[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pumps (wells and many other things)

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Mar 19 02:01:00 UTC 2020


Could you please simplify the "==Proposal==" section and make it 100% clear:

1) What new Keys and Tags (Key=Value) are being approved by the proposal
2) What old Keys and Tags are being deprecated
3) Move the Proposal section to the top, before Rationale, so people
will be clear on what the proposal is going to do if it is approved.

This is the current "==Proposal==" section. It's not clear what new
tags are being proposed and what old tags are being deprecated.

"It is proposed to complete OSM tagging for pumps used in any domain
with the following tags :

pump=* is currenlty established to state if a water well runs with a
powered or manual pump (actually how the pump is driven if it exists).
We also need a terminology to define the pump technology as many sorts
exist in industry. It's then proposed to refurbish this tag with
values related to pumps mechnanisms.

Devices used to drive pumps (and get water in case of water wells)
would be better described with existing actuator=* tag instead of
pump. handle=* is also suitable for manual pumps or emergency usage
with manual action when power isn't available.
This option allows to avoid pump:type=* as well."

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/19/20, François Lacombe <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Following several discussions last month, including this one:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/051385.html
> Here is a proposal regarding pumps, obvious devices we all more or less
> know in industries or at home.
> This knowledge is useful for water management, water accessibility,
> industry moderation, emergency response...
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Pumping_proposal
> Classification is based upon Wikipedia community extensive work about 15
> different pumping mechanisms. Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure some
> technologies are still missing in the proposal.
> It's currently the most ambitious version, including pump=* conversion for
> machine mechanisms and moving driver description to existing actuator=*
> Despite a consequent re-tagging effort (on water wells particularly), here
> are some pros arguments :
> - Use more appropriate terminology and wider possibilities for drivers with
> actuator=*
> - Avoid pump:type (:type doesn't bring any information)
> - With 30k occurrences of pump=* and +100k for water wells, there is still
> more wells to qualify than already qualified with pump availability.
> Examples are for now incomplete. It would be great to have at least one use
> case of each value. Feel free to contribute if you have appropriate
> pictures.
> Thank in advance for any comment, all the best
> François

More information about the Tagging mailing list