Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:healthcare=vaccination_centre

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Any more comments or concerns about the proposed tag healthcare
=vaccination_centre
?

I also considered amenity=vaccination_centre but I thought that
healthcare=* would be more likely to get approved. Either key seems fine.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 5:39 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> Thank you for taking the time to draft this! Looks generally ok and is
> needed.
>
> A small detail: maybe we would want to have a more explicit qualifier for
> the distinction between structures conceived for permant and temporary use,
> which could be added even if there is no official / precise end date, e.g.
> temporary=yes or interim=yes?
>
> Looking at used tags, it occurs to me, "temporary" is already in modest
> use and documented: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Atemporary
> "Use temporary=yes
> 
> to state that a feature is temporary.", consider adding a refernce to it in
> the proposal.
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[80hnhtv4agou--- via Tagging]

https://www.waterworld.com/home/article/16192273/introduction-to-wastewater-treatment-ponds#:~:text=The%20most%20often%20used%20ponds,and%20aerobic%20at%20the%20top.
  
>Thursday, December 17, 2020 1:15 PM -06:00 from Joseph Eisenberg 
>:
> 
>Re: "volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage"
> 
>I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water 
>reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere? We 
>can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth is 
>quite difficult, especially when it is not uniform. However for 
>man_made=reservoir_covered and =storage_tank we have capacity=* (in cubic 
>meters?) and content=water/sewage/etc.
> 
>It is possible to use ele=* for the elevation of the surface of the water if a 
>mapper has a very good GPS or finds this info on a sign, but this information 
>is also widely available from digital elevation models.
> 
>The usage is not often tagged yet, since this might be hard for a mapper to 
>know. 
> 
>Currently for landuse=reservoir and water=reservoir this is some use of 
>reservoir_type= -  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:reservoir_type - 
>with values of water_storage, sewage, tailings, evaporator, tank, salt_pan, 
>wastewater, slurry, irrigation, aquicultura, cooling, etc - though only the 
>first 4 are at all common.
> 
>basin=* is used with landuse=basin or water=basin to describe the form and 
>function of the basin: 
>*  basin = infiltration  - An  infiltration basin  catches storm water and 
>allows it to seep into an  aquifer .
>*  basin = detention  - A  detention basin  catches storm water and allows it 
>to drain slowly into natural waterways.
>*  basin = retention  - A  retention basin  catches storm water and retains 
>it, forming an artificial pond.
> 
>And note that salt ponds (used to evaporate salt from sea-water) are tagged as 
> landuse = salt_pond
>Pools for swimming are  leisure = swimming_pool
> 
>I don't see many combinations with usage=* or another tag that might describe 
>how the reservoir or basin is used, so perhaps this could be proposed?
> 
>-- Joseph Eisenberg
>   
>On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:36 AM François Lacombe < fl.infosrese...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>Hi all
>> 
>>I'm ashamed to not have enough time to be involved in all discussions 
>>regarding reservoir, ponds, basins and so on... and thank you to make such a 
>>capital topic on the table
>>I'd be happy with a tagging that separates the structure, the water body and 
>>purpose of a given feature.
>> 
>>Have a look to Storage chapter in this page (probably lacks many thing, it's 
>>just a start)
>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Water_management
>> 
>>There are at least 5 ways to tag features involved in (potable) water storage
>>What if I'm only interested to find "water storage places" with their volume, 
>>elevation and sometimes particular usage?
>>Waste water retention basins are a supplementary situation like we could find 
>>dozens of them.
>>Where will this end?
>> 
>>All discussed features share the "water body" concept (or more generic 
>>fluid-body with substance=water) inside very different structures with even 
>>different purposes.
>>Why don't we look to describe a generic water body, with a volume, elevation 
>>and usage prior to list every single feature that stores/retain water?
>> 
>>This said, it's fine to have many different tags to describe very different 
>>structures (building=*, man_made=*, natural=*...)
>>As such structures tagging should be separated from the water body they 
>>contain, an uniformed semantic for water bodies would make OSM a yet cooler 
>>place than it already is
>> 
>>All the best
>> 
>>François
>> 
>> 
>>Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 18:46, Brian M. Sperlongano < zelonew...@gmail.com > a 
>>écrit :
>>>I knew them as sewage treatment ponds, but apparently there's a name for 
>>>them:
>>>  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_stabilization_pond
>>> 
>>>I feel like this a separate class of object that deserves its own tag, 
>>>either within or separate from natural=water, or perhaps even subclassed as 
>>>water=basin+basin=waste?  
>>>On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 12:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then?
 
Isn't sewage 99% water?
 
I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open 
settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin + 
natural=water for these:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503
 
-- Joseph Eisenberg
 
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:55 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < 
tagging@openstreetmap.org > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by  dieterdre...@gmail.com :
>> 
>> 
>>sent from a phone
>> 
>>>On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
>>>You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the 

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

As just posted on talk

Thanks. Yes, it should have a definition. How about:

A base is the (almost invariably) enclosed area where a military
establishment is located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_base. It
will include a variety of buildings, facilities etc in the area, & may be
used by different branches of Military Service eg Army, Air Force. However,
they are different to a military=training_area, as that is where field
training, as opposed to classroom, takes place.

Yes, landuse=military will be a required tag, together with military=base

Thanks

Graeme


On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 12:10, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> So far the proposal lacks a definition of the new tag military=base
>
> The closest we get is "military=base for the area of each military
> establishment" but that makes it sound like almost any kind of
> landuse=military could have the military=base tag added.
>
> How should military=base be defined?
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:44 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
> >
> >
> > This proposal is also getting close to voting.
> >
> > Precis:
> >
> > deprecate:
> >
> > military=naval_base
> > protect_class=25
> >
> > modify:
> >
> > military=barracks
> >
> > add:
> >
> > military=base
> > military_service=xxx
> >
> >
> > There have been lot's of fantastic suggestions & comments made so far,
> so if you have any more, please add them either here or on the talk page.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Graeme
> >
> > ___
> > 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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

[Joseph Eisenberg]

So far the proposal lacks a definition of the new tag military=base

The closest we get is "military=base for the area of each military
establishment" but that makes it sound like almost any kind of
landuse=military could have the military=base tag added.

How should military=base be defined?

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:44 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:
>>
>> I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
>
>
> This proposal is also getting close to voting.
>
> Precis:
>
> deprecate:
>
> military=naval_base
> protect_class=25
>
> modify:
>
> military=barracks
>
> add:
>
> military=base
> military_service=xxx
>
>
> There have been lot's of fantastic suggestions & comments made so far, so
if you have any more, please add them either here or on the talk page.
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[Joseph Eisenberg]

The tag water_works=* is great for use with man_made=water_works - but
that's for treating water before it is used, not for treatment of sewage,
normally: "water works is a place where drinking water is found and applied
to the local waterpipes network."

But there is also
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwastewater_plant -
man_made=wastewater_plant so perhaps the key wastewater_plant=* would be
appropriate, e.g.: landuse=basin + content=sewage
+ wastewater_plant=decanter for your example?

I note that the page suggest using "water=wastewater" in this case instead
of water=basin or water=reservoir:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dwastewater - "A
clarifier/settling basin of a wastewater treatment plant" - used >32,000
times and pretty widespread globally:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=water=wastewater#chronology
- https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=water=wastewater#map

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 3:07 PM François Lacombe 
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Joseph,
>
> Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 20:16, Joseph Eisenberg 
a écrit :
>>
>> I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water
reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere?
We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth
is quite difficult, especially when it is not uniform. However for
man_made=reservoir_covered and =storage_tank we have capacity=* (in cubic
meters?) and content=water/sewage/etc.
>
>
> volume, elevation would be optional and mostly got from local signage.
> You may have opendata, knowledge or sometimes measurements.
> Many tags are already available but not used at the proper extent.
> For example, if we add capactiy (in cubic meters) on a waste water basin,
we could do the same for man_made=covered_reservoir or even water=reservoir
(if information is available somewhere)
> Look at this water tower hunting website giving many details from ground
http://chateau.deau.free.fr/rdef/PagesHTML/Sommaires/GermanDossiers.html
>
>>
>> The usage is not often tagged yet, since this might be hard for a mapper
to know.
>
>
> Regarding waste water basins, it could be useful to distinguish
> - sand traps
> - oil separator
> - floccuation
> - decanter basins
> - aeration tanks
> and so on...
https://www.horiba.com/fileadmin/_migrated/pics/Wastewater_Processing_E_.jpg
> That looks complex but easilly guessable from aerial imagery or even
clearly explained during public visits of facilities.
> We could define simpler values if it helps
>
>>
>> Currently for landuse=reservoir and water=reservoir this is some use of
reservoir_type= - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:reservoir_type -
with values of water_storage, sewage, tailings, evaporator, tank, salt_pan,
wastewater, slurry, irrigation, aquicultura, cooling, etc - though only the
first 4 are at all common.
>>
>> basin=* is used with landuse=basin or water=basin to describe the form
and function of the basin:
>>
>> basin=infiltration - An infiltration basin catches storm water and
allows it to seep into an aquifer.
>> basin=detention - A detention basin catches storm water and allows it to
drain slowly into natural waterways.
>> basin=retention - A retention basin catches storm water and retains it,
forming an artificial pond.
>>
>>
>> And note that salt ponds (used to evaporate salt from sea-water) are
tagged as landuse=salt_pond
>> Pools for swimming are leisure=swimming_pool
>>
>> I don't see many combinations with usage=* or another tag that might
describe how the reservoir or basin is used, so perhaps this could be
proposed?
>
>
>
> That's right, usage=* corresponds to large familiy of activities and more
specific tagging would be more suitable to describe precise purpose of a
particular basin
> reservoir_type and basin looks like to refer to reservoir/basin purpose
but mixes may concepts that may collide (irrigation is a water_storage as
well)
> Only some values would match with usage=* ones: usage=irrigation is used
12k vs reservoir_type=irrigation 50
>
> Waste water processing could be described with less used water_works=*
> man_made=basin (An artifical structure designed to store some fluid, you
find basins for storm/rain/radioactive water, sewage, oil, ...)
> content=sewage (Let's put waste water inside)
> usage=industrial (It's part of an industrial process)
> water_works=decanter (It's an actual decanter)
> capacity=
>
> I'd find great to use water=* with content=water, substance=water or
natural=water only.
>
> That's my 2 cents, let's refine it
>
> All the best
> François
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

With respect to basins, my understanding is that some of these have water
in them all of the time, some of them have water some of the time, and then
there are some that are almost always dry, but become wet only rarely when
they are needed (e.g. for stormwater handling)

Mappers have used BOTH landuse=basin tag as well as natural=water +
water=basin.  Both methods are documented in the wiki (parallel tagging
scheme).

Should basins be tagged as landuse, water, or both?  Or does it depend on
the type of basin?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:07 PM François Lacombe 
wrote:

>
> Hi Joseph,
>
> Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 20:16, Joseph Eisenberg 
> a écrit :
>
>> I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water
>> reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere?
>> We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth
>> is quite difficult, especially when it is not uniform. However for
>> man_made=reservoir_covered and =storage_tank we have capacity=* (in cubic
>> meters?) and content=water/sewage/etc.
>>
>
> volume, elevation would be optional and mostly got from local signage.
> You may have opendata, knowledge or sometimes measurements.
> Many tags are already available but not used at the proper extent.
> For example, if we add capactiy (in cubic meters) on a waste water basin,
> we could do the same for man_made=covered_reservoir or even water=reservoir
> (if information is available somewhere)
> Look at this water tower hunting website giving many details from ground
> http://chateau.deau.free.fr/rdef/PagesHTML/Sommaires/GermanDossiers.html
>
>
>> The usage is not often tagged yet, since this might be hard for a mapper
>> to know.
>>
>
> Regarding waste water basins, it could be useful to distinguish
> - sand traps
> - oil separator
> - floccuation
> - decanter basins
> - aeration tanks
> and so on...
> https://www.horiba.com/fileadmin/_migrated/pics/Wastewater_Processing_E_.jpg
> That looks complex but easilly guessable from aerial imagery or even
> clearly explained during public visits of facilities.
> We could define simpler values if it helps
>
>
>> Currently for landuse=reservoir and water=reservoir this is some use of
>> reservoir_type= - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:reservoir_type
>> - with values of water_storage, sewage, tailings, evaporator, tank,
>> salt_pan, wastewater, slurry, irrigation, aquicultura, cooling, etc -
>> though only the first 4 are at all common.
>>
>> basin=* is used with landuse=basin or water=basin to describe the form
>> and function of the basin:
>>
>>- basin =infiltration
>> - An 
>> infiltration
>>basin  catches
>>storm water and allows it to seep into an aquifer
>>.
>>- basin =detention
>> - A detention
>>basin  catches
>>storm water and allows it to drain slowly into natural waterways.
>>- basin =retention
>> - A retention
>>basin  catches
>>storm water and retains it, forming an artificial pond.
>>
>>
>> And note that salt ponds (used to evaporate salt from sea-water) are
>> tagged as landuse =
>> salt_pond 
>> Pools for swimming are leisure
>> =swimming_pool
>> 
>>
>> I don't see many combinations with usage=* or another tag that might
>> describe how the reservoir or basin is used, so perhaps this could be
>> proposed?
>>
>
>
> That's right, usage=* corresponds to large familiy of activities and more
> specific tagging would be more suitable to describe precise purpose of a
> particular basin
> reservoir_type and basin looks like to refer to reservoir/basin purpose
> but mixes may concepts that may collide (irrigation is a water_storage as
> well)
> Only some values would match with usage=* ones: usage=irrigation is used
> 12k vs reservoir_type=irrigation 50
>
> Waste water processing could be described with less used water_works=*
> man_made=basin (An artifical structure designed to store some fluid, you
> find basins for storm/rain/radioactive water, sewage, oil, ...)
> content=sewage (Let's put waste water inside)
> usage=industrial (It's part of an industrial process)
> water_works=decanter (It's an actual decanter)
> capacity=
>
> I'd find great to use water=* with content=water, substance=water or
> 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[François Lacombe]

Hi Joseph,

Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 20:16, Joseph Eisenberg 
a écrit :

> I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water
> reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere?
> We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth
> is quite difficult, especially when it is not uniform. However for
> man_made=reservoir_covered and =storage_tank we have capacity=* (in cubic
> meters?) and content=water/sewage/etc.
>

volume, elevation would be optional and mostly got from local signage.
You may have opendata, knowledge or sometimes measurements.
Many tags are already available but not used at the proper extent.
For example, if we add capactiy (in cubic meters) on a waste water basin,
we could do the same for man_made=covered_reservoir or even water=reservoir
(if information is available somewhere)
Look at this water tower hunting website giving many details from ground
http://chateau.deau.free.fr/rdef/PagesHTML/Sommaires/GermanDossiers.html


> The usage is not often tagged yet, since this might be hard for a mapper
> to know.
>

Regarding waste water basins, it could be useful to distinguish
- sand traps
- oil separator
- floccuation
- decanter basins
- aeration tanks
and so on...
https://www.horiba.com/fileadmin/_migrated/pics/Wastewater_Processing_E_.jpg
That looks complex but easilly guessable from aerial imagery or even
clearly explained during public visits of facilities.
We could define simpler values if it helps


> Currently for landuse=reservoir and water=reservoir this is some use of
> reservoir_type= - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:reservoir_type
> - with values of water_storage, sewage, tailings, evaporator, tank,
> salt_pan, wastewater, slurry, irrigation, aquicultura, cooling, etc -
> though only the first 4 are at all common.
>
> basin=* is used with landuse=basin or water=basin to describe the form and
> function of the basin:
>
>- basin =infiltration
> - An 
> infiltration
>basin  catches
>storm water and allows it to seep into an aquifer
>.
>- basin =detention
> - A detention
>basin  catches storm
>water and allows it to drain slowly into natural waterways.
>- basin =retention
> - A retention
>basin  catches storm
>water and retains it, forming an artificial pond.
>
>
> And note that salt ponds (used to evaporate salt from sea-water) are
> tagged as landuse =
> salt_pond 
> Pools for swimming are leisure
> =swimming_pool
> 
>
> I don't see many combinations with usage=* or another tag that might
> describe how the reservoir or basin is used, so perhaps this could be
> proposed?
>


That's right, usage=* corresponds to large familiy of activities and more
specific tagging would be more suitable to describe precise purpose of a
particular basin
reservoir_type and basin looks like to refer to reservoir/basin purpose but
mixes may concepts that may collide (irrigation is a water_storage as well)
Only some values would match with usage=* ones: usage=irrigation is used
12k vs reservoir_type=irrigation 50

Waste water processing could be described with less used water_works=*
man_made=basin (An artifical structure designed to store some fluid, you
find basins for storm/rain/radioactive water, sewage, oil, ...)
content=sewage (Let's put waste water inside)
usage=industrial (It's part of an industrial process)
water_works=decanter (It's an actual decanter)
capacity=

I'd find great to use water=* with content=water, substance=water or
natural=water only.

That's my 2 cents, let's refine it

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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
>

This proposal is also getting close to voting.

Precis:

*deprecate*:

   - military =naval_base
   
   - protect_class =
   25
   


*modify*:

   - military =barracks
   

*add*:

   - military =base
   

   - military_service
   

   =xxx
   



There have been lot's of fantastic suggestions & comments made so far, so
if you have any more, please add them either here or on the talk page.

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 02:33, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
> has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.
>

Here are some examples of tags as "waterway feature" + type=hazard
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/-28.0981/153.4583 (only visible
in "Edit" mode, as white markers)

No documentation that I can find though?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Re: "volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage"

I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water
reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere?
We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth
is quite difficult, especially when it is not uniform. However for
man_made=reservoir_covered and =storage_tank we have capacity=* (in cubic
meters?) and content=water/sewage/etc.

It is possible to use ele=* for the elevation of the surface of the water
if a mapper has a very good GPS or finds this info on a sign, but this
information is also widely available from digital elevation models.

The usage is not often tagged yet, since this might be hard for a mapper to
know.

Currently for landuse=reservoir and water=reservoir this is some use of
reservoir_type= - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:reservoir_type -
with values of water_storage, sewage, tailings, evaporator, tank, salt_pan,
wastewater, slurry, irrigation, aquicultura, cooling, etc - though only the
first 4 are at all common.

basin=* is used with landuse=basin or water=basin to describe the form and
function of the basin:

   - basin =infiltration
    - An
infiltration
   basin  catches
   storm water and allows it to seep into an aquifer
   .
   - basin =detention
    - A detention
   basin  catches storm
   water and allows it to drain slowly into natural waterways.
   - basin =retention
    - A retention
   basin  catches storm
   water and retains it, forming an artificial pond.


And note that salt ponds (used to evaporate salt from sea-water) are tagged
as landuse =salt_pond

Pools for swimming are leisure
=swimming_pool


I don't see many combinations with usage=* or another tag that might
describe how the reservoir or basin is used, so perhaps this could be
proposed?

-- Joseph Eisenberg


On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:36 AM François Lacombe 
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> I'm ashamed to not have enough time to be involved in all discussions
> regarding reservoir, ponds, basins and so on... and thank you to make such
> a capital topic on the table
> I'd be happy with a tagging that separates the structure, the water body
> and purpose of a given feature.
>
> Have a look to Storage chapter in this page (probably lacks many thing,
> it's just a start)
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Water_management
>
> There are at least 5 ways to tag features involved in (potable) water
> storage
> What if I'm only interested to find "water storage places" with their
> volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage?
> Waste water retention basins are a supplementary situation like we could
> find dozens of them.
> Where will this end?
>
> All discussed features share the "water body" concept (or more generic
> fluid-body with substance=water) inside very different structures with even
> different purposes.
> Why don't we look to describe a generic water body, with a volume,
> elevation and usage prior to list every single feature that stores/retain
> water?
>
> This said, it's fine to have many different tags to describe very
> different structures (building=*, man_made=*, natural=*...)
> As such structures tagging should be separated from the water body they
> contain, an uniformed semantic for water bodies would make OSM a yet cooler
> place than it already is
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
>
> Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 18:46, Brian M. Sperlongano 
> a écrit :
>
>> I knew them as sewage treatment ponds, but apparently there's a name for
>> them:
>>
>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_stabilization_pond
>>
>> I feel like this a separate class of object that deserves its own tag,
>> either within or separate from natural=water, or perhaps even subclassed as
>> water=basin+basin=waste?
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 12:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then?
>>>
>>> Isn't sewage 99% water?
>>>
>>> I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open
>>> settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin +
>>> natural=water for these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503
>>>
>>> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:55 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[François Lacombe]

Hi all

I'm ashamed to not have enough time to be involved in all discussions
regarding reservoir, ponds, basins and so on... and thank you to make such
a capital topic on the table
I'd be happy with a tagging that separates the structure, the water body
and purpose of a given feature.

Have a look to Storage chapter in this page (probably lacks many thing,
it's just a start)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Water_management

There are at least 5 ways to tag features involved in (potable) water
storage
What if I'm only interested to find "water storage places" with their
volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage?
Waste water retention basins are a supplementary situation like we could
find dozens of them.
Where will this end?

All discussed features share the "water body" concept (or more generic
fluid-body with substance=water) inside very different structures with even
different purposes.
Why don't we look to describe a generic water body, with a volume,
elevation and usage prior to list every single feature that stores/retain
water?

This said, it's fine to have many different tags to describe very different
structures (building=*, man_made=*, natural=*...)
As such structures tagging should be separated from the water body they
contain, an uniformed semantic for water bodies would make OSM a yet cooler
place than it already is

All the best

François


Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 18:46, Brian M. Sperlongano  a
écrit :

> I knew them as sewage treatment ponds, but apparently there's a name for
> them:
>
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_stabilization_pond
>
> I feel like this a separate class of object that deserves its own tag,
> either within or separate from natural=water, or perhaps even subclassed as
> water=basin+basin=waste?
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 12:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then?
>>
>> Isn't sewage 99% water?
>>
>> I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open
>> settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin +
>> natural=water for these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503
>>
>> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:55 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> sent from a phone
>>>
>>> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the
>>> natural=coastline) from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes
>>> is very important for proper rendering of many maps.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and it seems landuse=reservoir is used for sewage as well:
>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/reservoir_type=sewage
>>>
>>> is this appropriate for natural=water?
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

hazard=yes is neither banned nor discouraged.  It was simply not included
in the list of proposed approved tags due to objections raised during the
RFC.  The goal was to approve the hazard tagging that everyone agreed on.
Since hazard=yes has some existing tagging (>600 uses), it would still be
appropriate to document its use - it would just be listed as "in use"
rather than "approved" on its wiki page.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 12:21 PM ael via Tagging 
wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> >
> > Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep
> > rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers
> > are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging
> > waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway
> > barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls.
>
> Noone, AIUI, is suggesting otherwise. But in some cases, there may be a
> case for adding hazard=yes.
>
> Other issue with the current wiki entry is that hazard=yes is
> discouraged (banned?), in which case we get an awkward duplication like
> hazard=rapids. Maybe in such a case, one could be more specific
> like hazard=drowning, hazard=rocks, or whatever.
>
> Weirs are another case where some are much more dangerous than others,
> and some may warrant a hazard tag as well. Again a case where
> hazard=yes would be appropriate.
>
> ael
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

I knew them as sewage treatment ponds, but apparently there's a name for
them:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_stabilization_pond

I feel like this a separate class of object that deserves its own tag,
either within or separate from natural=water, or perhaps even subclassed as
water=basin+basin=waste?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 12:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then?
>
> Isn't sewage 99% water?
>
> I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open
> settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin +
> natural=water for these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:55 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg 
>> wrote:
>>
>> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the
>> natural=coastline) from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes
>> is very important for proper rendering of many maps.
>>
>>
>>
>> and it seems landuse=reservoir is used for sewage as well:
>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/reservoir_type=sewage
>>
>> is this appropriate for natural=water?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 17:08 +, ael via Tagging wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> > Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the
> > hazard key
> > has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.
> 
> Not in my part of the world. Why try to restrict the scope
> artificially?
> Hazard in British English (and all other dialects, I suspect) is a
> general term with no particular connotation with roads or even paths.
> Why force us to invent a new tag "hazard_not_on_a_highway" ???
> 
Very true, but if you a a canoeist then rapids are an attraction not a
hazard at all.

Phil (trigpoint)


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

[Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

[Joseph Eisenberg]

How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then?

Isn't sewage 99% water?

I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open
settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin +
natural=water for these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:55 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg 
> wrote:
>
> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the
> natural=coastline) from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes
> is very important for proper rendering of many maps.
>
>
>
> and it seems landuse=reservoir is used for sewage as well:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/reservoir_type=sewage
>
> is this appropriate for natural=water?
>
> No.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[ael via Tagging]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> 
> Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep
> rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers
> are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging
> waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway
> barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls.

Noone, AIUI, is suggesting otherwise. But in some cases, there may be a
case for adding hazard=yes.

Other issue with the current wiki entry is that hazard=yes is
discouraged (banned?), in which case we get an awkward duplication like
hazard=rapids. Maybe in such a case, one could be more specific
like hazard=drowning, hazard=rocks, or whatever.

Weirs are another case where some are much more dangerous than others,
and some may warrant a hazard tag as well. Again a case where
hazard=yes would be appropriate.

ael


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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Using terms such as "on a rampage" and "gods know where else he is
buldozzing" is inappropriate and does not contribute to this discussion.
Such rhetoric will not convince other mappers to use a certain tagging
method. This language does not promote an open and welcoming community. It
does not demonstrate an attempt to assume goodwill.

In this cross-cultural environment where many are writing in a language
which is not their primary means of communication and where we all live in
different places with different cultural values, it is very important that
we attribute good intentions to others.

If there are any problems with the ideas or words of another person, please
criticize the misinformation, but do not personally attack anyone or
suggest that another mapper had bad intent. Ad hominem arguments are not
persuasive nor effective.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 8:55 AM Tomas Straupis 
wrote:

> 2020-12-17, kt, 18:20 Joseph Eisenberg  rašė:
> > That's not accurate, Tomas.
>
>   Why? Mateusz without the end of discussion started, well continued
> editing the wiki (I had to correct some of his misinterpretations
> which have been discussed here), he also made some attempts in JOSM
> trac, these are the things I follow, but I do now follow Mateusz
> personally, so gods know where else he is buldozzing.
>
>   This is only pushing towards the splitting of tagging standards even
> further. We will introduce our approved tagging schemas/tools in
> Lithuania, somebody will follow (some probably have already done so)
> and what will we have then? I guess a wonderland for global data
> consumers. We probably need per country tagging lists ;-)
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[ael via Tagging]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
> has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.

Not in my part of the world. Why try to restrict the scope artificially?
Hazard in British English (and all other dialects, I suspect) is a
general term with no particular connotation with roads or even paths.
Why force us to invent a new tag "hazard_not_on_a_highway" ???

ael


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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Tomas Straupis]

2020-12-17, kt, 18:20 Joseph Eisenberg  rašė:
> That's not accurate, Tomas.

  Why? Mateusz without the end of discussion started, well continued
editing the wiki (I had to correct some of his misinterpretations
which have been discussed here), he also made some attempts in JOSM
trac, these are the things I follow, but I do now follow Mateusz
personally, so gods know where else he is buldozzing.

  This is only pushing towards the splitting of tagging standards even
further. We will introduce our approved tagging schemas/tools in
Lithuania, somebody will follow (some probably have already done so)
and what will we have then? I guess a wonderland for global data
consumers. We probably need per country tagging lists ;-)

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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Volker Schmidt]

There are area hazards around, like shooting ranges, and high electric
fields around radio transmitters, and more likely others.

I am not insisting on using the hazard key - I only noted similarities.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 17:33, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
> has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.
>
> Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep
> rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers
> are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging
> waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway
> barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls.
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:36 AM Tomas Straupis 
> wrote:
>
>> 2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė:
>> > This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the
>> > hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding
>> hazard=rapids
>> > although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are
>> > not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might qualify.
>>
>>   Note that rapid does not necessarily have to be interpreted as
>> hazard. If prominent on the ground it can be one of orienting points
>> (with bridges, settlements, intakes etc.) - to cover distance
>> covered/remaining. We have a lot of "small rapids" which can be easily
>> passed with no risk even with babies and they're still marked for
>> orienting purposes.
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.

Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep
rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers
are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging
waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway
barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:36 AM Tomas Straupis 
wrote:

> 2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė:
> > This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the
> > hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding hazard=rapids
> > although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are
> > not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might qualify.
>
>   Note that rapid does not necessarily have to be interpreted as
> hazard. If prominent on the ground it can be one of orienting points
> (with bridges, settlements, intakes etc.) - to cover distance
> covered/remaining. We have a lot of "small rapids" which can be easily
> passed with no risk even with babies and they're still marked for
> orienting purposes.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Joseph Eisenberg]

That's not accurate, Tomas.

The Tag:water=reservoir page has been edited by 4 people this week,
including ZeLonewolf, Warin61, Kjon and me (Jeisenbe):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Awater%3Dreservoir=revision=2073583=1860772
-
Mateusz has not edited this page.

The page Tag:landuse=reservoir has been edited several times by Mateusz,
but also by Tstraupis, ZeLonewolf and me - each 2 times in the past week.
The wiki documentation is a team effort which evolves over time:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:landuse%3Dreservoir=history

Please feel welcome to edit it further if there is information that is
missing, incorrect or misleading in the current version of the page.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:16 PM Tomas Straupis 
wrote:

> And while we're discussing here, Mateusz is already on a rampage to
> change wiki pages, write patches etc. Thus buldozzing his opinion,
> ignoring others. Showing "community building" behaviour.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] cable:ferry

[Alberto Nogaro via Tagging]

Maybe we might use “reaction” as a value for the ferry:cable 
  key for those specific 
types of cable ferries, and keep the value “yes” for a generic/unspecified type 
of cable ferry, and change the wiki definition accordingly.

 

Alberto

 

From: joost schouppe  
Sent: 17 December 2020 09:21
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools 
Subject: [Tagging] cable:ferry

 

Hi,

 

This article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry mentions 
ferry:cable=yes as a reaction ferry -  a specific type of cable ferry. While 
the article has a picture of a non-reaction cable ferry, it offers no tagging 
suggestion for that. So I'm guessing that in practice, there is no tag for 
reaction ferry at all, and the wiki definition of ferry:cable should be changed.


-- 

Joost Schouppe

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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Tomas Straupis]

2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė:
> This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the
> hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding hazard=rapids
> although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are
> not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might qualify.

  Note that rapid does not necessarily have to be interpreted as
hazard. If prominent on the ground it can be one of orienting points
(with bridges, settlements, intakes etc.) - to cover distance
covered/remaining. We have a lot of "small rapids" which can be easily
passed with no risk even with babies and they're still marked for
orienting purposes.

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

Re: [Tagging] cable:ferry

[Volker Schmidt]

What is missing in the route=ferry tagging is any way of indicating the
ferry type and/or size in general.
That would include a reaction ferry, amongst others

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 09:36, joost schouppe 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry
> mentions ferry:cable=yes as a reaction ferry -  a specific type of cable
> ferry. While the article has a picture of a non-reaction cable ferry, it
> offers no tagging suggestion for that. So I'm guessing that in practice,
> there is no tag for reaction ferry at all, and the wiki definition of
> ferry:cable should be changed.
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
>> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg  
>> wrote:
>>
>> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the 
>> natural=coastline) from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes 
>> is very important for proper rendering of many maps.
>>
>
>
> and it seems landuse=reservoir is used for sewage as well:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/reservoir_type=sewage
>
> is this appropriate for natural=water?
>
No.

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

[Tagging] cable:ferry

[joost schouppe]

Hi,

This article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry mentions
ferry:cable=yes as a reaction ferry -  a specific type of cable ferry.
While the article has a picture of a non-reaction cable ferry, it offers no
tagging suggestion for that. So I'm guessing that in practice, there is no
tag for reaction ferry at all, and the wiki definition of ferry:cable
should be changed.

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