Problematisches Proposal zu Umspannwerken gerade in der Abstimmung

Heißt "Vote end" 2019-03-23, dass die Abstimmung heute endet oder schon gestern endete? Darf ich mitstimmen, wenn ich mich erst jetzt für das Wiki registriere?

Hi everybody

Sorry for English, I really can't write you in German

As the author of the proposal I understand your concerns here.
Despite you're not really happy with yes/no values and my views of functions, can you elaborate a bit more about those 2 points please

• voltage and frequency are device properties, not facility. Mappers are encouraged to map *at least* the highest one. Then what can we deduce when voltage or frequency got only one value on a given substation?
  
• Basically, substation:transformation=no *explicitly* means there is no transformer to look for. It's not currently possible to assume the same with missing features or values, are you?
  

I'm not on OSM to force anyone to use tags and i'll enjoy discuss those points with you.
The proposal was announced three times on tagging, answers were provided on every contribution
Pipeline also have transmission, delivery and industrial substations. It's not about distribution only.
As explained, sharing "substation" between pipelines and power was already established, prior to this proposal

All the best

Ich bin nach wie vor dafür: "Wir mappen was wir vor Ort sehen".
Woher weiß ich ob in dem Trafohaus welche Frequenz oder welche Spannung erzeugt wird?

M.E. wird zuviel "Spezialistenwissen" in den Daten untergebracht, was nicht vor Ort nachvollziehbar ist. Steht dort eine Tafel mit Beschreibung der Trafostation, dann kann es eingetragen werden. Meist sind diese aber durch Zäune gesichert, so dass man diese Details nicht erfährt.

War das schon immer so, dass Votings nur 14 Tage laufen?

geri-oc wrote:

Ich bin nach wie vor dafür: "Wir mappen was wir vor Ort sehen".
Woher weiß ich ob in dem Trafohaus welche Frequenz oder welche Spannung erzeugt wird?

M.E. wird zuviel "Spezialistenwissen" in den Daten untergebracht, was nicht vor Ort nachvollziehbar ist. Steht dort eine Tafel mit Beschreibung der Trafostation, dann kann es eingetragen werden. Meist sind diese aber durch Zäune gesichert, so dass man diese Details nicht erfährt.

+1 !

Auch ich finde, dass es hier Probleme mit der OTG-Regel gibt, aber auch hier habe ich das so empfunden:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pro … s_proposal (Pipelines, Valves)

Das liest sich wie ein technisches Wiki.

Finally, I don't know how i'm supposed to bring you answers as I don't understand all details of your discussions.

My point wasn't how we tag transformers.
Opendata and public information is still forgotten from your point of view, worldwide power grid wasn't described in OSM from field only.
All is well explained here regarding transformers https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag … ransformer
By the way, German translation is outdated, are we talking with same information in mind? 😐

The way you are arguing here make me uncomfortable and upset.
I was blamed for a lack of communication while you are discussing here in German 🤣
No offence and that's not fair ladies & gentlemen.

InfosReseaux wrote:

Finally, I don't know how i'm supposed to bring you answers as I don't understand all details of your discussions.
[...]

Some people here argue, that the tags discussed in your proposal are not verifiable on the ground. But, to my opinion, this is also true for this proposal, which is already accepted:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pro … s_proposal

Sorry, but this is the German OSM forum, you may not expect English answers in here.

Gppes wrote:

Some people here argue, that the tags discussed in your proposal are not verifiable on the ground. But, to my opinion, this is also true for this proposal, which is already accepted:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pro … s_proposal

That's not because some features aren't accessible on the ground that all features will.
Public data enable anyone to check and report eventual mistakes.
Regarding valves, think about fire hydrants, domestic valves and devices accessible during opendays with pictures allowed (like this one : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … _valve.jpg => https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4857603616 )
And this for power transformers : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … _plate.jpg

Do you people really think I propose something I know by design people won't be able to map?
Seriously?

Sorry, but this is the German OSM forum, you may not expect English answers in here.

Users Norcross and TheBlackMan justify their vote with a link back to this page. Trying to understand and provide you answers is the least I can do.

Gppes wrote:

Sorry, but this is the German OSM forum, you may not expect English answers in here.

Doch, genau wie Fanfouer bin ich auf dieser Seite gekommen weil "See these arguments" auf der Stimmungsseite geschrieben war.
Als Frechheit würde ich dieses Verhalten beschreiben. Ich meine die Verweise aus einer Englischsprachigen Seite zu dieser Deutschsprachen Seite.
And now for Fanfouer.
Si, exactement comme Fanfouer je suis tombé sur cette page parce que "See these arguments" figuraient sur la page de vote.
Je qualifierais ce comportement de culotté. J'entends par là les liens d'une page en anglais vers cette page en allemand.

InfosReseaux wrote:

That's not because some features aren't accessible on the ground that all features will.

I do not understand that sentence.

InfosReseaux wrote:

Public data enable anyone to check and report eventual mistakes.
Regarding valves, think about fire hydrants, domestic valves and devices accessible during opendays with pictures allowed (like this one : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … valve.jpg)
And this for power transformers : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … _plate.jpg

Do you people really think I propose something I know by design people won't be able to map?
Seriously?

I'm not accusing you of anything, the on-the-ground rule is one of the most discussed and mentioned rule in OSM, you always will be confronted with it in some way.

I just went to the next power station in my neighborhood. It's a black box. I don't know what is going on in there. Some warning signs, an emergency phone number, the 50Hz humming. That's it. What am I going to do, if someone tags these quite sophisticated technical tags on it, how am I going to verify that on the ground? (And how am I going to do that with theses valves?) Too sophisticated and technical in my opinion. I wouldn't use that data in OSM at all. And I would not wait for some open day event to be able to verify it (in the case of my electrical black box in the neighborhood it will never going to happen anyways.).

InfosReseaux wrote:

Users Norcross and TheBlackMan justify their voting with a link back to this page. Trying to understand and provide you answers is the least I can do.

By writing here, you address all the people here, not just the ones mentioned. But I agree with you, linking to this German thread wasn't the best idea to justify the vote there... 🙂

trial wrote:

Gppes wrote:

Sorry, but this is the German OSM forum, you may not expect English answers in here.

Doch, genau wie Fanfouer bin ich auf dieser Seite gekommen weil "See these arguments" auf der Stimmungsseite geschrieben war.
Als Frechheit würde ich dieses Verhalten beschreiben. Ich meine die Verweise aus einer Englischsprachigen Seite zu dieser Deutschsprachen Seite.
And now for Fanfouer.
Si, exactement comme Fanfouer je suis tombé sur cette page parce que "See these arguments" figuraient sur la page de vote.
Je qualifierais ce comportement de culotté. J'entends par là les liens d'une page en anglais vers cette page en allemand.

Have a look at my other post, last paragraph. To my opinion, your response is not justified: Shouting words like "Frechheit" to this forum. Only because of a - minor - wrongdoing of single users.

[Edit: Some Denglish removed]

trial wrote:

Doch, genau wie Fanfouer bin ich auf dieser Seite gekommen weil "See these arguments" auf der Stimmungsseite geschrieben war.
Als Frechheit würde ich dieses Verhalten beschreiben. Ich meine die Verweise aus einer Englischsprachigen Seite zu dieser Deutschsprachen Seite.

Dann sag das den Usern, die dieses Verhalten gezeigt haben. Das Forum selbst ist die falsche Adresse. (Wäre dein französischer Beitrag hier dann nach deiner Definition auch eine Frechheit?)

--ks

Gppes wrote:

I do not understand that sentence.

Some features may be hidden, but others may be visible.
That's not because some can't be described that we have to avoid a whole schema for this particular reason.

I'm not accusing you of anything, the on-the-ground rule is one of the most discussed and mentioned rule in OSM, you always will be confronted with it in some way.

The fact is some valves, transformers or substations are easily accessible on the ground.
Verifiability point shouldn't be mentioned just because some don't.
Would you avoid tagging fountains just because some can't be seen from public space?

I just went to the next power station in my neighborhood. It's a black box. I don't know what is going on in there. Some warning signs, an emergency phone number, the 50Hz humming. That's it. What am I going to do, if someone tags these quite sophisticated technical tags on it, how am I going to verify that on the ground? (And how am I going to do that with theses valves?) Too sophisticated and technical in my opinion. I wouldn't use that data in OSM at all. And I would not wait for some open day event to be able to verify it (in the case of my electrical black box in the neighborhood it will never going to happen anyways.).

Public data should allow this verification.
Again, you face a particular situation and we have plenty easily verifiable to map elsewhere.

Furthermore my proposal didn't introduce big new things to map but change the way existing ones should be described.
And I still think expressed benefits are valuable as many cons arguments only negate objective reality.

• voltage isn't suitable to explicitly establish there is no transformer
  
• Conversion is a process and transmission is a hierarchical level and no reason makes the first impling the last only.
  
• A missing feature doesn't always imply it doesn't actually exist on the ground
  

• deleted *
  

I went through the proposal again; To my opinion, this kind of technical data is one further step to some kind of OSM tech spec database and - to my opinion - that is the wrong direction to go for OSM.

But if I got you right, your proposal is not so much about introducing new technical tags, but (re)organizing them.

I do not agree with you, how you interpret the on-the-ground rule in this case, because even if the data is openly accessible, you still need to have some technical background knowledge to tag those properties, but: A "fair" number of mappers within "fair" means should be able to tag or verify the properties on the ground, and that is - to my opinion - not the case here.

To sum up: I will abstain to vote on this proposal quite for the same reasons as Woodpeck does.

Fact is people didn't wait for us to map such things.
They use the term they find appropriate to deal with what they see. Without framework and documentation, this leads to poorly usable data.

Voting no on a tagging proposal won't prevent features to appear in the database, someone will add them.
Currently, about 40k people contribute on power grids mapping worldwide (they don't need to be advanced mappers to help a lot).
Power grid mapping provide more accurate data than publicly available records from operators (in France at least). OSM begins to be known for that and here is what it is useful for : https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Info … iary/47030

I didn't remember blaming railway people for starting power frequency or gauge of railway mapping because of need of extensive technical skills for that... or leaf_type promoters for need of botanical skills (which I really lack of).

InfosReseaux wrote:

I didn't remember blaming railway people for starting power frequency or gauge of railway mapping because of need of extensive technical skills for that... or leaf_type promoters for need of botanical skills (which I really lack of).

I blame the railway people for quite a lot... 😄 Honestly: I'm not very happy with lots of things established there... (OTG rule, excessive details, strange opinions about the life-cycle concepts... - And, wouldn't be an excuse anyways...

About the leaft_type: C'mon (did I get the wrong wiki page?): If it is about that, it is really not that complicated - and super easy to verify:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:leaf_type I'm 100% confident that: 'A "fair" number of mappers within "fair" means should be able to tag or verify these properties on the ground'

I'm sorry for not translating my criticisms earlier. Here they are: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tal … e_proposal

Power is complex. This can't be blamed to anyone.

Gppes wrote:

Have a look at my other post, last paragraph. To my opinion, your response is not justified: Shouting words like "Frechheit" to this forum. Only because of a - minor - wrongdoing of single users.

3 oder mehr die identisch agieren und sagen ca. "hier geht es".
Ich habe gezielt so geschrieben sodass nicht JedeR der/die hier schreibt sich angesprochen fühlt.
Das hier Deutsch gesprochen wird ist 100% in Ordnung. Muss ich es schreiben? Ehrlich? Es ist selbstverständlich so.

kreuzschnabel wrote:

Dann sag das den Usern, die dieses Verhalten gezeigt haben. Das Forum selbst ist die falsche Adresse. (Wäre dein französischer Beitrag hier dann nach deiner Definition auch eine Frechheit?)

--ks

Mein französischer Beitrag fängt mit "now for Fanfouer" an, es ist einfach die Übersetzung meines Deutschen Beitrags.
Ich nehme an dass JedeR hier "now for" versteht ;-).
Wäre die Diskussion zweisprachig, Deutsch und Englisch, hätte ich kein Problem damit.
Ab und zu schreibe ich auch in Englisch oder Deutsch auf der französischen Mailingliste, jedoch auch in Französisch.
Würde ich hier nur in Französisch schreiben wäre es nicht nur frech sondern auch dumm.

Druzhba wrote:

I'm sorry for not translating my criticisms earlier. Here they are: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tal … e_proposal

Thank you Druzhba, you'll find my answers as comment on the same page.

Hier noch das Ergebnis der Abstimmung:

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was rejected with 28 votes for, 30 votes against and 3 abstentions.