[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - electricity=*

[Jan Michel]

Hi,

I don't see a need to introduce new 'electricity:XY' keys.
The current definition of 'electricity' is to mark how an
amenity or building is supplied with energy. There is no intention
to have this key mark things like access for other people to this
energy source.
Access to electricity is tagged using 'power_supply' - and all your 
ideas would fit perfectly into the already existing
'power_supply' key. It seems to be the ideal occassion to revisit
this tag and bring it to a good shape.

Here's what I would do:

- There is no formal proposal for power_supply yet, so we should write one

- The option to have socket types as values is listed in the Wiki, but 
hardly ever used (93% of uses are plain yes/no), so this should be 
dropped as its mixing different things into one tag.

- Propose the new subtags according to your ideas, i.e.
	power_supply -> adjust values to be yes/no/grid/generator ...
	power_supply:socket -> values and meaning as in Key:socket
	power_supply:source -> values and meaning as described for power:source 
and generator:source
	power_supply:fee -> already in use!
	power_supply:access -> like in common tags like toilets:access
	
	
Jan	


On 30.10.20 13:44, Lukas Richert wrote:
> Since a lot of people apparently didnt see the RFC the first time, I'll 
> go back to RFC status for now. (I thought the threads were sorted by 
> subject title of the email and didnt check online if it was actually 
> visible. )
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The original message:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> after the comments on the confusing nature of the word 'source' in my 
> original proposal of 'electricity:source', I have now changed the name 
> to 'electricity:origin' as suggested on the discussion page. 
> Furthermore, I would like to revive and extend the proposal of the key 
> 'electricity' as this previously conflicted with parts of the 
> electricity:source proposal and was not consistent.
> 
> Both proposal pages:
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity
> 
> [2] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/electricity:source 
> 
> 
> The idea now is to allow for the tagging of buildings or amenities that 
> have electricity. The rationale is described in more detail at [1]. Tags 
> such as access, fee, schedule and origin can then narrow down the 
> availability to the public and the question of financial or direct 
> origin of the electricity.
> 
> This is distinct from the drafted tag power_supply as it is used to 
> describe the type of sockets used at a specific outlet. The values for 
> that tag are still currently under discussion.
> 
> I would also not tag this as a subset of power=* as this maps the 
> facilities and features that relate to the generation and distribution 
> of electrical power and should not be used to map the consumers of 
> electricity.
> 
> 
> I am eager to hear the feedback to the revised proposals!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Also, perhaps relevant: both the power_supply 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power_supply> and socket 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:socket> keys describe the same 
> feature. power_supply so far has occasionally been used in the manner 
> that electricity proposes to be. Unfortunately, the proposal for 
> power_supply is relatively inconsistent. I think the socket:* tag is 
> better thought out and also currently more used. I would be in favor of 
> deprecating power_supply and separating the two meanings it currently 
> has into electricity=* and socket:*=#.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Lukas
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>