Proposed features/Power transmission refinement

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Power transmission refinement
Status: Abandoned (inactive)
Proposed by: Fanfouer
Tagging: power=[[Tag:power=> <tt style="background-color:#dde; white-space:pre;" dir="ltr">power=line, power=cable, voltage=*|> power=line, power=cable, voltage=* ]]</tt>
Applies to: Node Way Transmission context and unify tags for power lines.
Definition: <definition>
Rendered as: Identical to power=line and power=cable
Draft start: 2013-11-04
RFC start: 2013-11-04
Vote start:
Vote end:

Proposal

This proposal aims to clarify the current usage of the power=* key in electricity transmission context and replace some other obsolete values such as power=minor_line.
This is the second main version of the proposal : the first one was rejected on 2013 November 1. Voting and feedbacks are still visible at the bottom of this page.

This proposal is now abandoned due to its size and the numerous topics it impacts. Please have a look to following documents for further discussion.
This document shouldn't be updated any more. Updates are now applied in the two subsequent proposals.

Basic Mapping

Large above ground power transmission towers and their conductors are common navigational references (used by hikers and pilots for example). These facilities are widely mapped. Draw one line to represent the wires hanging off a string of poles, then add nodes along the line to represent towers. When mapping from an air photo it is often helpful to look for the shadow cast by each tower: the node should placed at the intersection of the shadow and the apparent base of the tower.

  • For major transmission lines: draw a line in OpenStreetMap and tag it power=line, and add power=tower or power=pole on nodes representing towers or poles.
  • Use only one line in OpenStreetMap, even if there are multiple wires on a string of poles. Additional tagging for number of conductors (wires) is optional and described below.
  • Small and roadside distribution lines (particularly those with poles no taller than a wooden electrical pole) are not widely mapped. If mapped, tag the line with power=line as major lines, and for the pole nodes use power=pole.
  • If known, add operator=* to say who is operating the line. owner=* may be different.
  • If known, add voltage=*.
  • Don't create relations for power lines. Power lines have to be represented with Way power=line or power=cable only.

Rationale

Definitions

Wikipedia and IEC define power transmission infrastructures in these terms:

  • A power line (601-03-03, also referred as an electric line) is an arrangement of cables for transferring electricity between sources and loads. A power line may be consists in multiple circuits.
  • A cable (461-06-01) is an assembly of several conductors insulated within an assembly protection. It is generally designed to carry power underground.
  • A circuit is a set of conductors bundle, 1 for each phase of a multiple phase system and 1 for neutral if present. It is designed for transmitting a given power between two point of a system.
  • A bundle (466-10-20) is an assembly of several conductors which is the base item of all stuff exposed here.
  • A conductor (466-10-21) is an element which carries electric current. It has often a very bigger length than his cross-section dimensions (e.g. copper wire).
  • A neutral conductor ( 826-14-07 826-14-07) is a special conductor connected to the neutral point in a polyphase system. It can contribute to power distribution (and be part of a circuit) if present. Most of time in industrial power transmission systems, the earth is the ground conductor and circuits are only composed of phase conductors.
  • A ground conductor (466-10-25) is a security element which carries default electric currents or even lightning strokes when aerial. It can be grounded on every support or just regularly all along the line or cable path. It doesn't carry any current when line or cable are running normally and can't be part of a circuit.
  • Voltage (121-11-27) is the electric potential difference between two points and it's measured in volts.
  • A power tower (466-08-01) is a support which may be made of such material as steel, wood, concrete, and comprising a body which is normally four-sided, and cross-arms.
  • A power pole (466-07-01) is a vertical single member support in wood, concrete, steel or other material, with one end buried in the ground.
  • Power transmission (601-01-09) is bulk transfer of energy from power plants to consumption places.
  • Power distribution (601-01-10) is the transfer of energy to consumers inside a consumption place.

OSM usages

The best way to use them in OSM is to keep those simple definition and build a consistent tagging model.

It's not what is currently used, overhead and underground lines are using fairly different models:

  • power=line only identify aerial power lines.
  • power=cable documents integrated (indoor, tunnels, underground) power lines with insulated conductors.
  • location=* and layer=* tags are not used here although there are very common use cases in many other fields of knowledge in OSM.
  • voltage=* is currently used to document exploitation voltage of power lines & cables.

History

The initial draft started 2011 June 16 by User icon 2.svg FK270673 (edits, contrib, wiki, heat map). Thanks to him, User icon 2.svg Fanfouer (edits, contrib, wiki, heat map) got full ownership of the proposal and start completing it. Here is a summary of all the removed stuff in this new version.
In the early hours of RFC, it was intented to deprecate power=tower and power=pole in favor of man_made=tower and man_made=pole. Pros argued that towers and poles are far less linked to power than conductors themselves. Thus, such features should be moved to man_made=*.
This was finally removed from this proposal due to the lack of consensus around it, and the pretty mess to retag millions of features.

In its first final version, this proposal intended to unify all power lines way of mapping behind power=line.
This was rejected, due to the well establishment of power=cable and the need to distinguish overground features from buried ones.
It intended to introduce new tags conductors=* and bundles=* respectively in replacement of wires=* and cables=*. This was removed due to a lack of necessity despite a logical way of thinking.
If the voltage of a power line is unknown, Schusch suggested to add low, medium, and high as possible values for voltage=*.

New approaches

Some enhancement are needed to setup a consistent power model for transmission and routing.
This proposal is focused on the transmission infrastructure whereas the routing one is focused on power circuits, power paths and routing through the grids.
The only point discussed here is physical infrastructure (power lines), routing doesn't matter.

All those modifications would imply a little adaptation work for data consumers. We aim to be compliant with IEC definitions here and current model is not. If users wouldn't like to change their processes, they can use a current export of planet.osm. Nevertheless, re-tagging wouldn't be done until a long time.

This proposal is fully consistent with the early adopted circuits=* and introduce necessarily changes to introduce power routing with them Relation.

Tagging

Tagging is very important and first of all setup in a consistent way. We should take care of existing features, reuse them as often as we can but this proposal aims to refine model and will force us to re-tag some of these features.

Undergound vs overhead basic comparison

Secondly, power lines are the main element of power transmission.
It's really important to have a reliable and consistent model to show them up on the map.
We'll expose a two-axis tagging model for power lines : overhead lines and underground/undersea cables.

Let's answer the questions :

  • What is installed on towers/poles ?
  • What is buried under my feet ?

... in terms of circuits, bundles and conductors.

Please note the stuff above is dedicated to describe the whole line. The point isn't to describe each different circuit which may be installed on it. Circuits description will be available with new Relation in Power routing proposal

Transmission ways

Way overhead power=line

The goal here is to improve versatility of current model and to ease work for Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal which is coming too.

First of all, here are the common tags used for a power line. They are all consistent with the case "several circuits share the same tower/pole". We assume that conductors of a given circuit are designed to carry the same power. Thus, all conductors of a given circuit have the same number of conductors/same conductor cross-section dimensions.

Tag Value Description Recommendation
power line It's a power line mandatory
line bay, busbar Power line specificity. Mostly used in substations environement optional
usage transmission, distribution, ... Power line usefulness. See below for possible values recommended
operator operator The operator of the power line. recommended
layer ... The power line's level on the map. optional
circuits ... The number of power circuits on the power line. 1 circuit = 3 phases conductors in 3-phasis system. Neutral conductors can be part of one or several circuits whereas ground conductors aren't. See the tag's page for more information. optional
voltage Voltage in volts The voltage at which each circuit of the power line is operated separated by ; . It's strongly encouraged to add this value according to what it is said below. recommended
cables ... The number of conductor bundles on the whole line without any circuit consideration. optional
wires ... The number of conductor in bundles on the whole line without any circuit consideration. optional
frequency ... The frequency at which the power line is operating (separated by ; if different circuits don't have the same frequency)
Please note that frequency=0 is correct and dedicated to direct current power lines.
optional
neutral_conductors 0, 1, 2... Number of neutral conductors which are part of the power line. optional
ground_conductors 0, 1, 2... Number of ground conductors above power conductors to avoid lightnings to hit power line itself. optional
gas_insulated yes Use this tag for gas insulated power lines using pressurized SF6 or SF6/nitrogen gas as insulation medium. Gas insulation is typically used for bay lines or busbars in substations. optional
List of possible line=* values
Key Value Comment
line busbar (existing) Identifies the line as a busbar assembly.
bay (existing) Identifies the line as a bay.
List of possible usage=* values for a power line
Key Value Comment
usage transmission 601-01-09 Set the line as a wide link between cities to transmit power between power plants and consumption places. voltage=* is typically between 1000 kV and 100 kV.
distribution 601-01-10 Set the line as a local link distributing power between local and substation=minor_distribution substations. voltage=* is typically between 100 kV and 10 kV.
minor_distribution A minor distribution line link consumers to substation=minor_distribution substations. It distributes power in suburbs in very short distances.
traction The line is dedicated to traction activities with its own particular voltage=* and frequency=*.

Way Integrated power=cable

When going through cities, power lines aren't going aerial but underground, underwater or even in tunnels.
Conductors may be grouped inside an insulation sleeve and distances between them are strongly reduced.

Please note we don't make any circuit merging here : a power=cable feature is ideally mono-circuit (circuits=1 by default). Underground is often overcrowded by existing networks and it's hard to find enough place for multi-circuits power cables on a whole path. That's why several underground circuits between two substations won't necessarily go the same geographical way through cities.

Tag Value Description Recommendation
power cable It's a power cable mandatory
usage transmission, distribution, ... Power cable usefulness. See below for possible values recommended
operator operator The operator of the power cable. recommended
location underground, indoor, underwater or tunnel . Default is underground The power cable location recommended
layer ... The power cable's level on the map. optional
voltage Voltage in volts The voltage at which the power cable is operating. It's strongly encouraged to add this value according to what it is said upside. recommended
cables ... The number of conductor bundles in the whole cable without any circuit consideration. optional
circuits 1 by default The number of circuits in the cable path. optional
wires ... The number of conductor in bundles in the whole cable without any circuit consideration. optional
frequency ... The frequency at which the power cable is operating
Please note that frequency=0 is correct and dedicated to direct current power cables.
optional
neutral_conductors 0, 1, 2... Number of neutral conductors which are part of the power cable. optional
ground_conductors 0, 1, 2... Number of ground conductors part of the power cable to avoid parasites currents. optional
gas_insulated yes Use this tag for gas insulated power cables using pressurized SF6 or SF6/nitrogen gas as insulation medium. Gas insulation is typically used in indoor, tunnel or underground locations. optional
List of possible usage=* values for an insulated power cable
Key Value Comment
usage transmission 601-01-09 Set the line as a wide link between cities to transmit power between power plants and consumption places. voltage=* is typically between 1000 kV and 100 kV.
distribution 601-01-10 Set the line as a local link distributing power between local and substation=minor_distribution substations. voltage=* is typically between 100 kV and 10 kV.
minor_distribution A minor distribution line link consumers to substation=minor_distribution substations. It distributes power in suburbs in very short distances.
traction The line is dedicated to traction activities with its own particular voltage=* and frequency=*.

Details

power=minor_line and power=minor_cable replacement

Power lines and cables dimensions are mainly influenced by a scale factor : voltage. Distance between conductors and distance between supports and conductors depends on the voltage the line is supposed to carry.
In OSM, voltage=* tag should be the only piece of information which allow mappers to map this scale factor. Nevertheless the usefulness of the line or cable question is left without answer.
Actually, power=minor_line is only a declination of power=line regarding its voltage and sometimes its usage. Furthermore, it's the only "scaled" value in power=*. It must be replaced by common power=line for two main reasons :

  • There are not just "big overhead power lines" and "residential distribution" in power landscape. A wide range of features, designed for the voltage they are supposed to carry as explained above, exist and enhance the importance of "low voltage lines" with minor_line beside the rest in power=line don't represent reality at all.
  • Everyone is free to hide whatever he wants behind the minor_line voltage threshold. Data consumers won't be aware of this and will have to gather heavy detailed information about local specifications to know which voltage is really in use.

That's why this proposal is extending the definition of usage=* to give more information. Mappers can give more details about the theoretical power line usefulness without dealing with, sometimes complex, voltage considerations.

voltage=* determination

Voltage value guessing at first sight

It's possible to determine the value of built-in voltage=* of a power line by looking at two main design constraints:

  • First, insulation chains' length
  • Secondly, conductors spacing.


The main rule is just like that : about 1m per 100 kV.
According to picture, all the mapper has to do is looking at common power voltages running in its country to see which is the closest value for 1m and 2.5m. In France :

  • 1m = 100 kV => 90 kV or 63 kV depending of the place you're located in.
  • 2.5m = 250 kV => 225 kV for regional power lines in the whole mainland.


To be more accurate, it is possible to look on tower's base where the voltage is often available.

Support infrastructure

Node power=tower or Node power=pole

Referring to IEC definitions quoted above, a tower is a support that is normally four-sided and cross-arms built in wood or metal instead of a pole which is a single vertical element built in concrete or often in wood.
Such tags indicate structure of element and NOT its usage on a particular line (mainly depending on voltage).

Both should be used as described, regardless of voltage or any other rendering problem according to what User icon 2.svg RM87 (edits, contrib, wiki, heat map) explained on talk.

Here are a remainder of most used tags for both:

Node power=tower

Tag Value Description Recommendation
power tower It's a power tower mandatory
tower * Extra details about the tower. optional
tower:type * Information about the type of the tower optional
ref Tower reference Power tower reference as seen in situation optional
height height The height of the tower optional
operator operator The power tower operator's name. recommended
structure lattice, tubular or solid The structure pattern of the tower optional
material material The material which the tower is made of. optional
colour tower colour The colours of the tower, separated with a ; . optional
design tower design The design of the tower. It may include operator's internal references. See [F44] for example in France. optional

Node power=pole

Tag Value Description Recommendation
power pole It's a power pole. mandatory
pole * Extra details about the pole optional
pole:type * Information about the type of the pole optional
ref Pole ref Power pole reference as seen in situation optional
height height The height of the pole optional
operator operator The power pole operator's name. recommended
material material The material which the pole is made of optional
design pole design The design of the pole. It may include operator's internal references. optional

Node tower=*

Value Description
power_transition The tower itself is a location transition (e.g. from aerial to underground) without fence around it (if fence, see substation=transition)

Node pole=*

Value Description
power_transition The pole itself is a location transition (e.g. from aerial to underground) without fence around it (if fence, see substation=transition)

Node tower:type=*

Value Description
power_termination The tower is ending a power line.

Node pole:type=*

Value Description
power_termination The pole is ending a power line

Node power=terminal

Trafohaus.jpg

Terminals are useful to link power lines to building in an aerial way according to the picture.
They often can be encountered when connecting an overhead line to an indoor substation
They must be tagged accordingly :

Tag Value Description Recommendation
power terminal It's a power terminal mandatory
ref Terminal reference Power terminal reference as seen in situation optional
height height The height of the terminal from the ground optional
operator operator The power terminal operator's name. recommended

Location transition

Location transitions are very useful when power lines goes aerial and connect to underground or undersea cables.
Such transitions now often occurs with urban and suburbs development but with two main different types.

Fenced transition facilities

Adjacent substation proposal is dealing with it by introducing a dedicated type of transition substation : power=substation + substation=transition.
It represents the fenced area which surrounds the transition facility. Transition characteristics may be written with some other tags, please see the proposal for more information.

Concerning power lines, putting power=pole or power=tower, typically located in the middle of such transition substation, in common of both underground line and aerial line is enough.

Non fenced facilities

Sometimes, transitions between air and underground or undersea are lighter than a fenced substation. We can use tower=power_transition and pole=power_transition as below:

Transition place Tag Description
On a power tower tower=power_transition
Sindelfingen Gesockelter Mast 2007 by-RaBoe 03.jpg
When transition is built on a power tower.
On a power pole pole=power_transition
E66-Wind-converter-and-power-pole-16-05-2005.jpeg
When transition is built on a power pole, typically on low voltage networks.

Features hosted on poles/towers

Switch on a 20 kV power line pole

Sometimes, features like transformers or switches could be hosted at top of poles or towers. This is often observed on local distribution lines.

Transformer

Use transformer=yes or transformer=distribution to host a transformer on a pole or tower.
References of both pole and transformer may be distinguished with ref:pole=* and ref:transformer=*.

Switch

Use switch=yes to host a power switch on a pole or tower.
References of both pole and switch may be distinguished with ref:pole=* and ref:switch=*.

Connections

Use connection=yes to signify there is a connection between power lines sharing the same pole or tower.
It is assumed it won't be possible to distinguish two different connections on the same support but this will be solved with power routing.

Terminations

Sometimes, sections of power lines can only be a stub where power can't go anywhere.
Two tags should be considered to qualify such towers/poles : tower:type=power_termination and pole:type=power_termination

Aditionnal stuff

Aerial junctions and integrated junction box

Junction box on an underground power line

Every power lines are composed of sections abutted one after the other with junctions. When underground, each junction can be placed in a concrete box as for easing later access and protect the junction itself.
Let's introduce power=junction to map such junction boxes when we can see them during construction works.
You can see an example | here.


Markers

Underground power line marker in France

Surface markers indicating the presence of such an underground power line should be mapped with the new value power=marker as suggested twice in the first vote process.


Connections

Free air connection between two overhead lines

Connections between lines often occurs and two different circumstances : in free air or directly on supports, poles or towers.
They can be mapped with power=connection when occurring without support.
Have a look to this chapter to see how to map when on tower or poles.


Neutral distribution

Neutral conductor is a component of AC lines which may be present or not.
Typically on high voltage lines, operators would often choose not to add it because it's expensive. Earth will be the only way for power to go back to power plants and it's better like this.
But neutral will be there on local distribution lines, thus cables=* won't only reflect how many phases/poles we have on that particular lines.

neutral_conductors=* will be useful to precise :

  • If neutral conductor is part of the line or not
  • How manywe have to remove from cables=* to know how many phases are part of the AC line or how many poles are part of a DC line.



Furthermore, please note when neutral conductor is part of the line, voltage=* should be given between that neutral conductor and phases.
For example, French local distribution lines are 400 V between phases but 220 V between a single phase and neutral conductor. In this particular case, voltage=* should have value 220 V.

Codification schemes worldwide

As for sustainably identify features inside power networks, some existing codification schemes can be used in OSM. You can find details about them right below by following links.

ENTSO-E Energy Identification Code (EIC)

EIC stands for Energy Identification Code and the scheme is used by power transport companies (TSO) in Europe.
Its main advantage is to be common to a large bunch of countries and allow us to locate any feature by using the geographical prefix in the codes.
You can find details on the [ENTSO-E website]
The codes can be set on features with the ref:ensto:eic=* key.

Guidelines for line mapping

To avoid confusion in routing and navigation tools, we must adopt strict guidelines to map power lines (like any other linear stuff like roads or railroads).

One line = one situation

Each Way power=line must group features with the same characteristics, especially the same number of circuits. When a tag key or value changes (or needs to be added/removed), the line feature must end and a new line start so that the properties can be correctly tagged, just as with any other feature in OSM.

Layer distinguishing

Two lines sharing some poles

As User icon 2.svg Alv (edits, contrib, wiki, heat map) suggested on talk, layer=* is needed when there are two different Way power=line partially sharing some of the poles on some stretch, like in the image on the left. (In the past some suggested not to map these as two ways, but that seems wrong when the other line doesn't touch all the nodes, yet the other line has to touch all of the pole nodes.
Their circuits are not directly connected here. The line mounted higher is maybe 10 to 25 kV, and the lower line (probably 400V) has more densely spaced poles because of the street/footway lamps it feeds. A power line way should only touch the pole/tower nodes that the conductors "touch" (via the insulators, naturally).
The elevation hardly ever corresponds to a building level, except where the line penetrates the wall of the building it was built to feed.

This situation differs when two or several circuits (even from different voltages) shares exactly the same supports and must be mapped as a single power=line.

Values to be replaced

All other values of power=* (power=minor_underground_cable, power=underground_cable, ...) should be replaced as below:

Obsolete tag Used for ? New tag(s) to use
power=minor_line Low voltage line power=line + voltage=* + usage=minor_distribution
power=underground_cable Underground cable power=cable + location=underground
power=underground_cable Sea cable power=cable + location=undersea. Please notice that a line could be under the sea floor, such case should be treated like classical terrestrial underground lines with location=underground.
power=minor_underground_cable Low voltage underground cable power=cable + location=underground + voltage=* + usage=minor_distribution
power=tower A pole on a high voltage line power=pole at any voltage, it's a pole.
power=pole A tower on a low voltage line power=tower at any voltage, it's a tower.
tower=air_to_ground A transition between aerial and underground tower=power_transition
tower:type=termination A tower terminating a power line tower:type=power_termination
tunnel=yes Power cables hosted in a human accessible tunnel location=tunnel

This table is a guideline for replacement only. Take it with caution and don't do mass edit.

Examples

Let's try to expose current projects, maybe under construction, and legacy ones to give useful case studies to mappers.

20 kV overhead distribution lines

Way Power line:

Key Value
power line
usage distribution
operator ERDF
voltage 20000
frequency 50
circuits 1
cables 3
wires 1
neutral_conductors 0 or don't use it
ground_conductors 0 or don't use it

More information:

Node Power poles or power towers:

Key Value
power pole or tower
operator ERDF in France

French "Cotentin-Maine" 400 kV project

Contentin-Main project is a power line built as for improve power transit from Flamanville new PWR nuclear reactor. It consists in a 100% overhead lines, two 3 phases circuits linked to power substations of French power grid operator, RTE France.

Way Power line:

Key Value
power line
usage transmission
name Cotentin-Maine
voltage 400000
circuits 2
cables 6
wires 4
frequency 50
operator RTE
start_date 2013
neutral_conductors 0 or don't use it
ground_conductors 2

More information:

Node Power towers:

Key Value
power tower
operator RTE

Underground power lines : Annecy'nergie 2013

Underground power lines mapping

Annecy'nergie 2013 is another project conduced by RTE and it aims to put underground all suburbs overhead lines, like in many other French cities.
Furthermore, some substations were created to sustain increasing place demand of electricity.

Way Power line:

Key Value
power cable
usage transmission
location underground
layer -1
operator RTE
cables 3
wires 1
name Name of the power line
voltage Voltage of the line (mainly 63000V)
neutral_conductors 0 or don't use it
ground_conductors 1

More information:

Local power distribution lines

Such local lines support power transit between last transformer to consumers.
They can run along roads or be underground, especially in cities or suburbs
When distribution is done with alternative current, a neutral conductor is part of the lines.

Voltage is here given between neutral and phase !

Way Power line:

Key Value
power line
usage minor_distribution
operator Local operator's name
voltage Voltage of the line (mainly 220V or 110V)
neutral_conductors 1
ground_conductors 0 or don't use it

Typical HVDC power line

HVDC power lines are used to carry power at high voltage and through long distances.
They are currently highly recommended due to the massive intercontinental power lines roll-out.

Way Power line:

Key Value
power cable
usage transmission
operator Operator's name
location underground
voltage Voltage of the line (maybe 750 kV or 1100 kV)
cables 2
frequency 0
neutral_conductors 1 (neutral is always present on DC power lines)
ground_conductors 0 or don't use it.

More information:

Features/Pages affected

Reference pages

Descriptive pages

Rendering and Tools/Renderers affected

  • power=line features should be rendered only when they are located overhead. Common rendering rules may choose to avoid underground/sea stuff (or show them with light dashes) since they can't be seen by people. Special theme maps can adapt rendering to show the location difference.
  • power=line features thickness on maps should be computed from voltage=* value : high voltage lines should be rendered a bit wider than low voltage ones, as now with power=minor_line.
  • power=pole should be rendered with a big plain grey dot instead of power=tower which can be rendered the same as now.

Tools

  • JOSM : Update presets for underground lines (post approval ticket creation)
  • ID : Idem

Render

  • Update mapnik / mapCSS definitions to show power lines as described above.
  • Update at least the following other stylesheets similarly: openstreetbrowser.org, freietonne.de, 4umaps.eu, hikebikemap.de, openstreetmap.de "OSM deustscher stil" style, Reit- und Wanderkarte, latlon.org, osmorg.crite.net, openorienteeringmap "Pseud-O" style, their own style at lightmap.uni-hd.de, and wikimedia toolserver(?) "black and white osm".

Comments

Please post in the discussion page for any comments.

Voting

Voting has not started yet.

First vote. From 2013 October 18 to 2013 November 1

8 pros against 20 cons : the proposal is rejected.
Work will keep going on this and take in account all the feedbacks exposed here.
Thank you.

  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. I don't like the depreciation of minor_line --chris66 (talk) 12:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Bigfatfrog67 (talk) 14:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --hendrik-17(talk) 15:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. As I've argued within the comment phaze: Even if otherwise a sound proposal, two things are a no-no. 1) There are no easy-to-distinguish guidelines for "very high" to "low" - how would your grandmother know which one to use? If they can't tag properly, consumers can't use the tag at all (see also Talk:Verifiability#problem_with_concept for an old 2009 example with "tall" and "average", which are values equal to the ones proposed in this case.) 2) A "big overhead wire on big pylons" is physically totally different from a "underground invisible linear something built by the power transmission company" - the tag should be different, as it has been to date. Alv (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
You can roughly estimate the voltage by the isolator's size. Power=minor_line was estimated as well, with everybody having his own threshold. --FK270673 (talk) 17:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Three problems: 1) "cable" vs "line". I agree with Alv here. From the perspective of mappers overhead power lines and underground cables are very different things. The first is a very visible thing that most mappers would map. The second is essentially "non-existent". Further, the proposal would immediately break existing rendering, as the cables will suddenly be rendered as overhead lines. From a specialist (power engineer) viewpoint you could argue that they are conceptually the same thing, but for the normal mapper they are definitely not. 2) The new "bundles" and "conductors" tags are very confusing. I initially suggested (and now regret that) to replace the "cables" and "wires" keys by "conductors" and "bundle" (singular!) but you have interchanged the meaning of those terms making it very confusing. 3) You suddenly introduce a new primary "line" key for junction boxes and markers. We discussed this on [1] some days ago (I didn't notice that you were talking about a new primary tag, not an attribute tag for power=line). "line" is currently used as an additional attribute tag for different features (power=line, highway=busstop, type=route relations). It would be a very bad thing to introduce it as a primary tag. --polderrunner (talk) 07:40, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --FK270673 (talk) 17:31, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. -- There's lots of deprecating/renaming of existing usage going on here without any real justification or a real reason for such a heavyweight operation. First of all, the "new system" is supposed to discern minor_line/line from voltage alone, so why there's then a need to unify them at all? Renaming wires/cables is made for the sake matching naming with standard x, the current keys are just as fine but do not need any deprecating. There are plenty of other "misleading" keys in use already such as highway=path etc. and that's not a serious problem! It's not problem to keep using the legacy keys here either! There's no real justification given for removal of power=cable, besides "all lines should be same", which isn't good enough reason especially as there's clear reason why it should NOT be deprecated as has been pointed out many times already! There are also good elements in this proposal though but sadly the redefine everything approach which is far too common nowadays in proposals is making the proposal totally unsuitable for adopting as is. Ij (talk) 19:24, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --[[User:Bredy|Bredy] 14:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Crochet.david (talk) 06:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Fanfouer (talk) 10:37, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I pending this proposal. (from a non-electrical POV) The difference between overhead and underground lines should stay in the main tag (same as railway=station, railway=yard and railway=service_station)--rayquaza (talk) 12:53, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Too many renamings; underwater cables really did mess up the proposal. --Zverik (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. same reason like User Alv --Seawolff (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. --4rch (talk) 15:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Has few nice aspects, but IMO not worth tho rename all the existing stuff. The ideas about 110/220/400 V (not kV) are inconsistent.Basstoelpel (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. The view and needs of electrical engineers should not overrule the view and needs of cartographers. --EvanE (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Oli-Wan (talk) 09:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Foxxi59 (talk) 10:00, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. --Oberaffe (talk) 10:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC) For me is a high tension line different to a cable and should be not tagged with the same tag. Everything else is OK for me
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. 1) a low voltage cabe in residential area should not be tagged with the same main tag as a high voltage overhead line. So the four main tags power=line, power=minor_line, power=cable and power=minor_cable are very meaningful to distinguish the different types of power lines. 2) The new names for the tags cables=* and wires=* are not better (not more intuitional) than the old names. 3) The tag circuit=* ist not well defined. Do unused conductors count as circuit? 7) In 'definitions' you say 'conductors carries electric current'. Which current carries a ground_conductor=*? 8) So many redefinitions, but no clear definition for power=tower and power=pole? 9) In germany also 220 kV is very high voltage. --Adjuva (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Deprecating a tag with >70k uses is just not acceptable. --Scai (talk) 15:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Farad (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Michi (talk) 18:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. There's just too much "deprecate" in this proposal. A good proposal must harmonize with what's there instead of trying to overthrow long-established tagging. If this gets accepted, we'll have a ton of people doing mass-edits on the database in an attempt to "fix" all the "deprecated" tags. There are no deprecated tags. --Frederik Ramm (talk) 18:41, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. See the numerous reasons above. --Dachefte (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. deprecation of minor_line is a no go. level with high/low whatever is completely bogus. Nobody will care and tag whatever they like. Look at tracktype for completely nonsense use of "level" like tags. --Flohoff (talk) 21:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. The proposal's purpose is to make mapping clearer, but instead it introduces a lot of complex changes. 1) voltage=very_high, introduced here, does not exists in the approved proposal for substations and will lead to inconsistency in tagging. 2) The new names for the tags cables=* and wires=* are not better (not more intuitional) than the old names. 3) I'm in doubt about tagging of underground lines with power=line. It is correct in the context of electrical engineering and power routing. But it can seriously break map rendering and using data in applications. We should continue our work with this proposal, not simply throw it away. It has a lot of reasoned things. --Surly (talk) 04:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Your introduction says that this proposal "aims to clarify the usage", but you don't mention what needs to be clarified. You also want to deprecate/rename some abundantly used tags but keep secret why they need to be renamed. All in all, the benefits of the changes don't become clear. Concerning the additions, layer=* would fit better than level=*, and pipeline=marker or power=marker seem more consistent than line=marker. I'm ok with the new values for voltage=*, but they contradict your goal to "obtain a more precise way to specify voltage". --Fkv (talk) 07:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. I'm sorry but I also disagree on the need of deprecating power=minor_line, power=cable and the other ones as there are not major problems like we had with generator and station. There are however some things I would agree with: the new values for voltage when unknown, and a new tag for power line markers, but I would prefer power=marker. The proposal should be reduced to only add small easy things to map and understand and not deprecate these well-established tag without any serious reason. --Don-vip (talk) 22:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Don't change established and commonly used tags /al (talk) 09:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)