[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Process tanks.

François Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Sun Mar 28 12:41:41 UTC 2021

Hi Bert,

I see major issues with this reasoning, I explain why below.

Le sam. 27 mars 2021 à 17:16, Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <
bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com> a écrit :

> I don't see any added value for OSM to make a new top-level value for
> process tanks.
> As an engineer, I can say that any process tank, depending on the stage in
> the process, is a storage tank.  Even if you would take into consideration,
> that due to what appliances it has or how it is build, doesn't give you a
> clue of whether it is used as a process tank or just a storage tank.
The main difference between storage and process tanks is that you get the
same output than input in the first and not for the last.
At least any change in the contained substance is not expected in storage
tanks despite it could happen in some circumstances which often should be

> Many get disused for, primarily processing, others don't.  Especially in
> water sewage faculties it is often difficult, even for me as an engineer,
> if it is still in use as a process tank, intended to be a process tank
> (because some storage tanks we just add f.i. an aerator and it becomes a
> process tank ?).  Now you expect that this tag is going to solve this
> problem, an issue where even experts disagree many times.
Tags are used to state objective differences seen on ground. A new tag will
not introduce new differences on ground but bring ability to mappers to
describe precisely what they seen.
Then the point is not to find this difference every time but to be able to
describe it even once in the world.
If a property lacks of consensus, OSM community should make a decision like
"An aerator is a process tank".

Secondly, sewage processing facilities are often public service, then
sometimes open to visit, often with public information available nearby or
online. Then be able to transpose such public knowledge on OSM should be
considered as a common practice whatever complexity is.

A tank is just a tank, add some attributes to it if you are sure and have
> seen proven that it is used for more then just storage, then add attributes
> to it like in a process=* tag.
We certainly agree on this one.
One problem: none of us was there when it came to define
man_made=storage_tank (I would certainly had chosen another one for this)
and now storage_tank is unlikely to be changed due to its usage.

Right now one of the main priority is to be consistent with existing

> Essentially nothing is wrong to keep it under other top level tags, being
> it water=reservoir, basin or pond or man_made=storage_tank.  They all can
> become a process tank somewhere in the processing of the fluid, they all
> are just storage tanks in some stage of the processing. Keep it simple.
I don't understand what you mean.
Will someday a drinking water covered storage tank be part of any
processing? I guess no.

All the best

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210328/70479f1b/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list