Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Warin]

On 20/3/20 9:27 am, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 20/03/2020 1:41 am, Tobias Wrede wrote:


Mail delivery address I would expect to find under the contact:* 
scheme if at all.




Probably under contact:mail, however most of the current values:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/contact%3Amail#values

seem to be contact:email with a small typo. 




Also contact: looks to be over taken by simpler tagging of phone: email:


Unfortunately mail looks to be used for mail:second_class, mail:franked etc


Maybe yet another tag mail_address=* ???  (I can hear the hair pulling 
from here, thanks.)



Fundamental questions:

What is the key addr for?

For physical addresses only?

If not, what else OR ?


The wiki is not clear to me.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Pumps (wells and many other things)

[Michael Patrick]

 > you've a typo here, and it is worth pointing it out, that's meant to be
4000 years according to the link... interesting links.

> Since pumps have been a manufactured commodity for about 400 years ( 
> https://www.worldpumps.com/general-processing/features/a-brief-history-of-pumps/
> there is an abundance of existing typologies and taxonomies dealing with
> pumps.
>

Operative word here is 'commodity', as opposed to custom one off devices.
When something becomes an item of commerce, multiples are made, and
differentiate into distinct categories, which in turn means that industry
begins to develop a lexicon based on some mutually understood
classification system.  For ocean going vessels, this started with Lloyds
of London in 1760 eventually evolving into today's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_of_Classification_Societies
... sometimes it maybe some sort of central publication like my copy of the
1556 "De Re Metallica" that unifies the lexicon: (
https://pictures.abebooks.com/isbn/9780486600062-us.jpg )
*"Originally published in 1556, Agricola's De Re Metallica was the first
book on mining to be based on field research and observation — what today
would be called the "scientific approach." It was therefore the first book
to offer detailed technical drawings to illustrate the various specialized
techniques of the many branches of mining, and the first to provide a
realistic history of mining from antiquity to the mid-sixteenth century.
For almost 200 years, Agricola remained the only authoritative work in this
area and by modern times it had become one of the most highly respected
scientific classics of all time. A book more often referred to in
literature on mining and metallurgy than any other"*
The central work for picking around that date was probably Decarte's
Hydrostatics Manuscript (
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Descartes-Hydrostatics-Manuscript-AT-X-69_fig1_323533598
), but there was a lot practical ground level stuff happening around that
time, and the concept of 'pump' became a first order category of it's own,
a technology and commodity, designed rather than a trial and error
tradition.

Michael Patrick
Data Ferret
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Andrew Davidson]

On 20/03/2020 1:41 am, Tobias Wrede wrote:


Mail delivery address I would expect to find under the contact:* scheme 
if at all.




Probably under contact:mail, however most of the current values:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/contact%3Amail#values

seem to be contact:email with a small typo.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Pumps (wells and many other things)

[François Lacombe]

Hi Michael,

Thank you for such interesting links :)
I was looking for established classification but most of time several
properties are mixed in attributes which is less usable.
My points below.

Le jeu. 19 mars 2020 à 05:01, Michael Patrick  a
écrit :

> Since pumps have been a manufactured commodity for about 400 years ( 
> https://www.worldpumps.com/general-processing/features/a-brief-history-of-pumps/
> ) there is an abundance of existing typologies and taxonomies dealing with
> pumps. If the goal is a general tagging scheme that can further be refined
> when needed to more detailed descriptions, there is a fairly low delta from
> a complete scheme compared to an incomplete one which will grow by random
> accretion. See  IEEE GlobalSpec's Engineering360
> https://www.globalspec.com/pfdetail/pumps/types
>
That sounds the most promising repository I could integrate to proposed
pump=* values.
Note that some proposed values already match this IEEE classification
(Wikipedia may took inspiration there)


> 
> There are public domain classification systems available also, like
> *UNSPSC* # *4015151 *takes you to a  Stainless Steel Deep Well
> Submersible Pump. See  the section " 2.2. Industrial Categorization
> Schemes and Product Data Management in 'Inter-organizational Networks" in 
> Integrated
> Product Ontologies for Inter-Organizational Networks' at
> https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c471/40672c0c2e5a34c098fcd2809185537ee985.pdf
>

Main problem of "Stainless Steel Deep Well Submersible Pump." is such a
name give many information, but let the mechanism unknown.
We've got material=*, submersible=yes/no and eventually man_made=water_well
but no corresponding value for pump=*
I've got the same issue with European INSPIRE classes as well in other
projects.

Once solved, this would be useful to give more details about a given pump=*
value in a further proposal.

All the best

François
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

[François Lacombe]

Hi Joseph and thank you for such a quick and complete comment session

That 7 points allowed to change the proposal a bit and include
man_made=windmill, watermill instead of actuator.
Answers are available in Talk :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Pumping_proposal
I hope lacks of clarity are now fixed.
In case an answers solve a problem, don't hesitate to use {{Resolved|
comment}} template to close it.

Again, anyone would be welcome to propose situations involving pumps to
complete example sections.

All the best

François

Le jeu. 19 mars 2020 à 03:27, Joseph Eisenberg 
a écrit :

> I oppose deprecating pump=powered, pump=manual, and pump=no. This is a
> simple, clear system for use with water wells, and it is widely
> supported.
>
> 1) Clarify use with man_made=water_well
>
> Currently 88% of uses of pump=* are with man_made=water_well (the rest
> are with amenity=drinking_water) and with the 3 values: pump=powered,
> pump=manual, pump=no. This is a simple and intuitive system for
> mapping wells in developing countries and rural areas.
>
> Please clarify if you are asking mappers to add a separate
> man_made=pump feature or if that should only be used when there is no
> man_made=water_well feature.
>
> Why should we drop the use of pump=powered, pump=manual, pump=no?
> Distinguishing pump=powered, pump=manual is easy: you can hear the
> sound of an electric or diesel motor, and a manual pump has an obvious
> handle or similar. And pump=no is a well with a bucket or similar.
>
> 2) How can mappers figure out the technology of the pump?
> How are mappers expected to find out the pump technology mechanism?
> Most pumps are located deep inside the well, or hidden in a service
> building or structure next to the well. And why would this information
> be worth mapping?
>
> 3) Key:actuator
> The proposal mentions: actuator=windmill, actuator=watermill, and
> actuator=beam_engine. What do these have to do with pumps?
>
> The current use of the key actuator is quite rare, but the documented
> values are: actuator=manual, actuator=electric_motor,
> actuator=pneumatic_cylinder, actuator=hydraulic_cylinder - these don't
> seem to have anything to do with windmills and watermills?
>
> What about the exiting tags man_made=windpump, man_made=windmill,
> man_made=watermill? Are you proposing to deprecate these common tags?
>
> (also in the examples "actuator=manual" is mentioned, but it isn't in the
> list)
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 3/19/20, Joseph Eisenberg  wrote:
> > François,
> >
> > 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 :
> >
> > man_made=pump
> > pump:output=*
> > 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  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
> 

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 at 14:43, Tobias Wrede  wrote:
> Isn't the addr:* scheme used to describe the physical address of a 
> location/building/amentiy/etc.?
>
> PO Boxes, privat bags etc. are addresses where mail for someone residing at 
> said location is delivered to.
>
> As addr:* I would always put in what is needed to find the place as a visitor 
> and that is a housenumber and street, a house name or any other place name. 
> And sometimes there might be nothing besides city or postcode.
>
> Mail delivery address I would expect to find under the contact:* scheme if at 
> all.

Those would be my thoughts too.

Robert

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Pumps (wells and many other things)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 19. März 2020 um 05:02 Uhr schrieb Michael Patrick <
geodes...@gmail.com>:

> Since pumps have been a manufactured commodity for about 400 years ( 
> https://www.worldpumps.com/general-processing/features/a-brief-history-of-pumps/
> ) there is an abundance of existing typologies and taxonomies dealing with
> pumps.
>


you've a typo here, and it is worth pointing it out, that's meant to be
4000 years according to the link...
interesting links.

Cheers
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Tobias Wrede]

Hi Warin.

Isn't the addr:* scheme used to describe the physical address of a 
location/building/amentiy/etc.?


PO Boxes, privat bags etc. are addresses where mail for someone residing 
at said location is delivered to.


As addr:* I would always put in what is needed to find the place as a 
visitor and that is a housenumbet and street, a house name or any other 
place name. And sometimes there might be nothing besides city or postcode.


Mail delivery address I would expect to find under the contact:* scheme 
if at all.


Tobias



While there are methods of entering street addresses there don't appear
to be any way to enter addresses that use Post Office Boxes and other
delivery types.

There is a proposal to may the existence of PO Boxes but no way to enter the
address data for those that use them.

As well as PO Boxes there exits several types of delivery methods in
Australia, below are listed all of the officially accepted types with their
officially accepted abbreviations.

Care of Post Office  CARE PO

Community Mail Agent.  CMA

Community Mail Bag CMB

Community Postal Agent  CPA

General Post Office Box GPO BOX

Locked Bag LOCKED BAG

Mail Service MS

Post Office Box PO BOX

Roadside Delivery  RSD

Roadside Mail Box/Bag  RMB

Roadside Mail Service  RMS

Private Bag  PRIVATE BAG

These all appear in the same placement of the addressed article. Perhaps
a new tag addr:delivery_type=* could be used?

Examples>

Mr Smith

PRIVATE BAG 32

Tennant Creek

Northern Territory  0862

addr:delivery_type=PRIVATE BAG 32

Mr Jones

GPO BOX 3

Sydney

NSW 2000

addr:delivery_type=GPO BOX 3

In these cases there is no house number, street. There are still
city/state/country and postal codes.

--

References?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Mail_Box

https://www.staff.uwa.edu.au/facilities/mail/formats

https://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/430096

https://www.barklyhomestead.com.au/  -'contact us' they use PMB for
Private Mail Bag.




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

[Tom Pfeifer]

This discussion originally started in this changeset, which quite obviously was _not_ driven by a 
ground survey:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/76766631

Some even larger in Sweden:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/76998968
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77003019
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/76996948

The latter give source="Lantmäteriet Topographic Map" which appears to be CC0 
according to the wiki,
ok, however probably not the best source for large-scale mechanical edits.

Haven't found the edits on the Balkan yet that you mentioned in the CS 
discussion.

Regarding the question lake vs. pond, please remember the world is not black 
and white.

As with many features in OSM that could be A or B, there are always clear cases where everybody 
agrees that one object is A and the other clearly B, but there are cases where it depends on the 
judgment of the mapper.


The water in my neighbour's garden is a pond. The thing in the middle of a village is a pond. Quite 
observable.
The excavation from the most recent ice age, where I can swim, is a lake. Now go and find things in 
between.


On 19.03.2020 14:15, pangoSE wrote:
> IMO pond should not be mapped because it is not observable on the ground. How do you determine if 
it is

> "artificially created"/"man made"?

On 19.03.2020 14:42, Paul Allen wrote:


Oh, you're talking about water=pond after all.  Nothing about
water=pond says man_made or natural, it just says that there is
a pond of water.


tom

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 at 13:17, pangoSE  wrote:

> IMO pond should not be mapped because it is not observable on the ground.
> How do you determine if it is
> "artificially created"/"man made"?
>

You're asking whether it should be man_made=pond or natural=pond?  It's
neither.

See:
>
> A pond : a body of standing water,
> man-made in most cases, that is usually smaller than a lake.
>
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dpond

Oh, you're talking about water=pond after all.  Nothing about
water=pond says man_made or natural, it just says that there is
a pond of water.

As it stands right now in the wiki I suggest we either deprecate the tag
> completely or change the definition to something that is observable on the
> ground.
>

Finally, after all the misleading stuff you wrote, you get to the point.
You
believe that the definition of a pond says that it is man-made and that
'we're (usually) unable to tell if a pond is natural or man-made.  But the
definition does NOT say ponds are man-made, it says "man-made in
most CASES" which means pond can be man-made or natural.

It might be sensible to make the definition a little more clear, but you've
mainly been arguing against your own misinterpretation of what it
currently says.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

[Andy Townsend]

On 19/03/2020 13:15, pangoSE wrote:


Hi

IMO pond should not be mapped because it is not observable on the 
ground. How do you determine if it is

"artificially created"/"man made"?


Most ponds that I add are as a result of survey, so "should not be 
mapped because it is not observable on the ground" doesn't make a lot of 
sense to me.  To be honest, I usually just leave them as natural=water, 
but that's just my laziness.



As it stands right now in the wiki I suggest we either deprecate the 
tag completely or change the definition to something that is 
observable on the ground.


If you're sat there looking at a pond, it's usually pretty obvious 
whether it's man-made or not.  Has it got a man-made dam at one side and 
is it fed by obviously man-made ditches?  Then it's probably man-made.  
Is it just in a natural dip in the ground with none of those features?  
Then it probably isn't.


Even if you're looking at imagery some of those features will still be 
visible - mill ponds show up pretty clearly, as do the waterways created 
to feed them.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

[pangoSE]

Hi

IMO pond should not be mapped because it is not observable on the 
ground. How do you determine if it is

"artificially created"/"man made"?
See:

A pond : a body of standing water, 
man-made in most cases, that is usually smaller than a lake.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dpond

Lake: a body of relatively still fresh or salt water, localized in a 
basin that is surrounded by land. Artificially created lakes are tagged 
aswater =pond 
orwater 
=reservoir 
. 
Intermittent lakes (which disappear seasonally) should be tagged 
withintermittent 
=yes; salt lakes — 
withsalt 
=yes.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dlake 



As it stands right now in the wiki I suggest we either deprecate the tag 
completely or change the definition to something that is observable on 
the ground.


WDYT?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Warin]

On 19/3/20 3:00 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

“32 Tennant Creek” won’t work?


Tennant creek has a number of streets that could contain '32', it would not be 
considered 'correct addressing' by the postal service..
Putting addr:street=PRIVATE BAG 32  could work but there is no street 'PRIVATE 
BAG 32'.


As mentioned, addr:full could work


Yes, that seams suitable  .. I had skipped over it assuming that the rest was 
to do with physical features, sorry.
But it won't be parsed by software. I don't think that will matter much.

 

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:48 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:


On 19/3/20 1:57 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

there don't appear to be any way to enter addresses that use Post Office 
Boxes

Post office boxes are located at a post office usually, and that is
mapped as amenity=post_office -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpost_office



I am not talking of the physical thing, but entering the address of a 
feature.

Example:

The Barkly Homestead

Has an address of

PRIVATE BAG 32

Tennant Creek

Northern Territory  0862



In OSM I can enter the state, town and post code.
addr:village=Tennant Creek
addr:state=Northern Territory
addr:postcode=0862

I cannot enter the "PRIVATE BAG 32" as there is no OSM tag for it.

Humm just came across addr:place, that may do?
Err no "make sure there is a matchingplace 
=*  object of the same name to keep data 
consistent. It is required by Nominatim for it to be able to find the addresses using it"
there is no place that is "PRIVATE BAG 32" or "POST OFFICE BOX 3" ...



???



other delivery types:
Roadside Delivery  RSD
Roadside Mail Box/Bag  RMB

Are these letter boxes located next to the road, but rather far away
from the house?

These are mapped as amenity=letter_box, I believe?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dletter_box

There is also amenity=post_box for a device where you deposite
outgoing letters:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpost_box

Is anything else missing, which can't be mapped with these tags or
with Key:addr:* ?

If none of the common values of addr:* will work, you can use addr:full=*

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr%3Afull

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/19/20, Warin<61sundow...@gmail.com>    
wrote:

Hi,

While there are methods of entering street addresses there don't appear
to be any way to enter addresses that use Post Office Boxes and other
delivery types.

There is a proposal to may the existence of PO Boxes but no way to enter the
address data for those that use them.

As well as PO Boxes there exits several types of delivery methods in
Australia, below are listed all of the officially accepted types with their
officially accepted abbreviations.

Care of Post Office  CARE PO

Community Mail Agent.  CMA

Community Mail Bag CMB

Community Postal Agent  CPA

General Post Office Box GPO BOX

Locked Bag LOCKED BAG

Mail Service MS

Post Office Box PO BOX

Roadside Delivery  RSD

Roadside Mail Box/Bag  RMB

Roadside Mail Service  RMS

Private Bag  PRIVATE BAG

These all appear in the same placement of the addressed article. Perhaps
a new tag addr:delivery_type=* could be used?

Examples>

Mr Smith

PRIVATE BAG 32

Tennant Creek

Northern Territory  0862

addr:delivery_type=PRIVATE BAG 32

Mr Jones

GPO BOX 3

Sydney

NSW 2000

addr:delivery_type=GPO BOX 3

In these cases there is no house number, street. There are still
city/state/country and postal codes.

--

References?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Mail_Box

https://www.staff.uwa.edu.au/facilities/mail/formats

https://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/430096

https://www.barklyhomestead.com.au/  -'contact us' they use PMB for
Private Mail Bag.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org  
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging