Rare route=* values - route=power

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Rare route=* values - route=power

Joseph Eisenberg
Who is using route=power?

It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
but it's used 15,000 times.

Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?

- Joseph Eisenberg

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Warin
On 11/1/20 4:19 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Who is using route=power?

It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
but it's used 15,000 times.

    
Only used is very small parts of the world - as seen on taginfo map.
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=power#map

For contrast there are over 500,000 power=line in the data base,
and the use is world wide..
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/power=line#map



Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?

    
Not usefull.
Verifiable? As in there are power lines there, yes. 
However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there .. but 'traffic' can be in both directions. 
I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power. 





_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Joseph Eisenberg
The taginfo map is misleading, because it doesn't show the location of
relations, and almost all route=power features are relations with
type=route. Try overpass-turbo instead, for example in Italy:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/PF9

On 1/11/20, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 11/1/20 4:19 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> Who is using route=power?
>>
>> It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
>> but it's used 15,000 times.
>
> Only used is very small parts of the world - as seen on taginfo map.
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=power#map
>
> For contrast there are over 500,000 power=line in the data base,
> and the use is world wide..
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/power=line#map
>
>
>>
>> Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?
>
> Not usefull.
>
> Verifiable? As in there are power lines there, yes.
>
> However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there ..
> but 'traffic' can be in both directions.
>
> I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power.
>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Warin
Arr .. thanks.. found one 'near' to me.
After more info from a user, if they respond, see

Arr On 12/1/20 1:45 am, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
The taginfo map is misleading, because it doesn't show the location of
relations, and almost all route=power features are relations with
type=route. Try overpass-turbo instead, for example in Italy:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/PF9

On 1/11/20, Warin [hidden email] wrote:
On 11/1/20 4:19 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Who is using route=power?

It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
but it's used 15,000 times.
Only used is very small parts of the world - as seen on taginfo map.
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=power#map

For contrast there are over 500,000 power=line in the data base,
and the use is world wide..
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/power=line#map


Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?
Not usefull.

Verifiable? As in there are power lines there, yes.

However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there ..
but 'traffic' can be in both directions.

I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power.





_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Joseph Eisenberg
I opened an issue at the Taginfo repository requesting that relations
be included on the map, or the title of the map changed to
"Geographical distribution of ways and nodes with this tag" -
https://github.com/taginfo/taginfo/issues/274"

On 1/12/20, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Arr .. thanks.. found one 'near' to me.
>
> After more info from a user, if they respond, see
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78020394
>
>
> Arr On 12/1/20 1:45 am, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> The taginfo map is misleading, because it doesn't show the location of
>> relations, and almost all route=power features are relations with
>> type=route. Try overpass-turbo instead, for example in Italy:
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/PF9
>>
>> On 1/11/20, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 11/1/20 4:19 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>>> Who is using route=power?
>>>>
>>>> It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
>>>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
>>>> but it's used 15,000 times.
>>> Only used is very small parts of the world - as seen on taginfo map.
>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=power#map
>>>
>>> For contrast there are over 500,000 power=line in the data base,
>>> and the use is world wide..
>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/power=line#map
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?
>>> Not usefull.
>>>
>>> Verifiable? As in there are power lines there, yes.
>>>
>>> However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there
>>> ..
>>> but 'traffic' can be in both directions.
>>>
>>> I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

François Lacombe-2
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
Hi Joseph,

Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 06:21, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Who is using route=power?

Some electricity mappers including me.

route=power represents a circuit (metallic continuity) between two or more substations.
It is different from a line as a physical lines can hold several of those circuits for a given distance (situations where you have n x 3 cables in a 3-phases power network).
 
It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
but it's used 15,000 times.

The proposal didn't reach the requested consensus.
There are currently two options for power routing, including route=power but until now we didn't manage to find a single solution to be voted. Discussion is still open I think.
 
Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?

It is really useful and verifiable : follow the connected cables.
Some countries like France make open data available that describe those relations.

See this Overpass query to see how it's going for RTE in France : https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yUw
We've just finished a few days ago to complete all ~1520 relations for 400kV and 225kV.

Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 07:03, Warin <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?
Not usefull.
Wow, how can you say that?
 
However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there .. but 'traffic' can be in both directions. 
I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power. 
Let us know how you can map this without a route relation :

Given the fact this line holds two independent circuits : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/130110647

All the best

François
 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Warin
On 13/1/20 11:36 am, François Lacombe wrote:
Hi Joseph,

Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 06:21, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Who is using route=power?

Some electricity mappers including me.

route=power represents a circuit (metallic continuity) between two or more substations.


Continuity can be had by the lines sharing a node. In the same way roads share a node to enable routing.


It is different from a line as a physical lines can hold several of those circuits for a given distance (situations where you have n x 3 cables in a 3-phases power network).


I would expect a line that has n*3 cables to be tagged cables=3;3 (for n=2, add more ;3 for more n). This would signify that the 3 phase circuits are separate.

Humm problem in identifying which of the 3 phases is connected to which when the line splits off.


Who uses this route relation - as in a end use? Or is this a 'build it and they will come' thing?


 
It has no documentation except for a rather confusing Proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal/Tagging_similar_to_Transportation_routes)
but it's used 15,000 times.

The proposal didn't reach the requested consensus.
There are currently two options for power routing, including route=power but until now we didn't manage to find a single solution to be voted. Discussion is still open I think.
 
Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?

It is really useful and verifiable : follow the connected cables.
Some countries like France make open data available that describe those relations.

See this Overpass query to see how it's going for RTE in France : https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yUw
We've just finished a few days ago to complete all ~1520 relations for 400kV and 225kV.

Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 07:03, Warin <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Is this feature actually useful and verifiable?
Not usefull.
Wow, how can you say that?
 
However I view them similar to roads .. there maybe a power line there .. but 'traffic' can be in both directions. 
I see no point in having a dedicated 'route' for power. 
Let us know how you can map this without a route relation :

Given the fact this line holds two independent circuits : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/130110647

All the best

François
 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

François Lacombe-2
Hi

Le lun. 13 janv. 2020 à 04:08, Warin <[hidden email]> a écrit :

Continuity can be had by the lines sharing a node. In the same way roads share a node to enable routing.

This is not a good idea since sometimes, lines sharing a node aren't necessarily connected
 

I would expect a line that has n*3 cables to be tagged cables=3;3 (for n=2, add more ;3 for more n). This would signify that the 3 phase circuits are separate.

Humm problem in identifying which of the 3 phases is connected to which when the line splits off.

That's the point and really difficulct to make it work without a relation.
Debate is open about route=power which may be replaced by a more meaningful tag (power=circuit for instance)
 

Who uses this route relation - as in a end use? Or is this a 'build it and they will come' thing?

It's first of all a kind of challenge to produce a whole dataset.

End use cases are the same as public transport : automatize this kind of chart production, feed simulators, routing software...
"Build it and they will come" is a bit necessarily since taking data from GIS isn't a so common thing currently. BI and asset management are still often separated from GIS
This has to change and osm can bring useful tools for that.

All the best

François

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

Joseph Eisenberg
> Debate is open about route=power which may be replaced by a more meaningful tag (power=circuit for instance)

+1 to this idea of power=circuit. And then use "type=power" instead of
"type=route" if you make a relation, or if the circuit is less than a
few hundred nodes you could just use a linear way.

-Joseph Eisenberg

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rare route=* values - route=power

François Lacombe-2
Le mar. 14 janv. 2020 à 01:33, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> Debate is open about route=power which may be replaced by a more meaningful tag (power=circuit for instance)

+1 to this idea of power=circuit. And then use "type=power" instead of
"type=route" if you make a relation,

This is a point of the whole debate and, why not type=power + power=circuit.

But i'm merely against power=circuit_segment and independent relations for branch and trunk.

According to experience in France, a single relation involving all lines and substations with appropriate roles (trunk, branch, whatever) is enough and doesn't force to create several relations.
This point have to be cleared with proposal authors prior to vote.
 
or if the circuit is less than a
few hundred nodes you could just use a linear way.

I don't get that point.
Circuits need to be a relation.
A single way can't do the job since you have two substations to involve at least.

All the best

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging