I am using OSM data on my travels and one of more annoying failures is case where I arrived at some drinking water source, discovered that it is broken/gone/disused/abandoned. And on editing OSM it turns out that it was already marked this way but in a very weird way.
Here I want to handle: amenity = drinking_water amenity = water_point man_made = water_well with one of condition = not_working working = no disused = yes operational_status:availability = never operational_status = out_of_order operational_status = broken operational_status = closed operational_status = non_operational operational_status = non operational operational_status = non-operational operational_status = no operational_status = No operational_status = Non-Functional operational_status = Non-operational operational_status = non opérationnel operational_status = non operational_status = Non-Operational operational_status = non fonctionnel operational_status = non_functional operational_status = Non aperationnel operational_status = Closed,Need repair stateofrepair = broken wetap:status = broken Edit would use lifecycle prefixes and replace use of operational_status and similar. This would make using this data far more feasible. If someone is interested in nonfuctional water sources, they can query also for lifecycle-prefixed ones. If someone is not, then they are far less likely to get ugly surprises. Typical edit would look like this: for https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5036984190 * removed: amenity = water_point * removed: man_made = water_well * removed: operational_status = out_of_order * added: disused:amenity = water_point * added: disused:man_made = water_well for https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5036984192 * removed: amenity = water_point * removed: operational_status = broken * removed: pump = manual * added: disused:amenity = water_point * added: disused:pump = manual this edit makes sense as having wild variety of hahaha_this_object_is_not_actually_working=yes is not reasonable main problem here is that say operational_status = closed amenity = drinking water may be actually now fully gone, or abandoned - not merely disused But I think it is worth doing it as tagging it as operational (with amenity = drinking water) is heavily misleading. There is a variety of checks and tests, cases where bot encounters unexpected data are skipped. For example if note or description key is preset entry is skipped. If key pump has unexpected value entry is skipped - the same for many other keys. If object also has say ruins=yes or abandoned=yes it is skipped as maybe it is not merely disused. In general any unexpected tag causes object to be skipped. I tried contacting mappers but this tagging is primarily coming from organised edits/imports and people who added them are inactive and not responding to changeset comments. It is also primarily present in areas where opening notes results in no results whatsoever. Still, if people think it is a good idea I can first do bot edit where I post changeset comments to people who used this kind of tagging and ask them for feedback. Edit would be global and recurring if such tagging would reappear. see also https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-inactive-water-wells-man-made-water-well-disused-yes-vs-disused-man-made-water-well/97827 (where preferred tagging was discussed some time ago) and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trolltag (describes my complaint about tags like operational_status=Non-Functional)
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
