Talk:Key:pump:status
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
What is the meaning here?
man_made=water_well + pump:status=broken + water_well=pump appears in many cases ( https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/113v ) and its meaning is unclear to me.
Is it a water well with broken pump but you can still use bucket to get water? Is it broken pump and you are unable to get water in any way? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- It means, that there is a pump (as an physical object) but you can't get water from it (e.g. because the groundwater level may have dropped or the pumping mechanism is broken). The water well (= a deep hole) still exists, but it's mechanism can't supply water. I think most of this cases are tagged in Berlin (where I'm from): Here we have created an almost complete and well-maintained dataset of ~2.000 emergency water pumps in OSM over the last two or three years. Details can be found here, unfortunately in German language. --Supaplex030 (talk) 21:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- In such cases I think that lifecycle prefix seems clearly preferably for man_made=water_well (disused:man_made=water_well ?) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I would say: No, because the water well itself is a different entity than the pump. The well (= the deep hole) is fine, but the mechanism that is put on top of the well (= the pump) is broken. An disused water well, on the other hand, would be something like the one shown in the picture: The well shaft is still there, but there is nothing to get water at all (the well shaft is covered/closed with a cap in this case). --Supaplex030 (talk) 11:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well, IMHO that would not be merely disused: but something like removed: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- We are using removed:pump=* in this case, because literally the pump has been removed. removed:man_made=water_well we only use if the well shaft was filled and can never be used again. Often, disused water wells will be reactivated some years later, if the administration has some money again: Then they only put a new pump ontop of the shaft. (Thats also "disused" in the sense wiki says: "Not currently available for use, but could be reinstated easily". At the moment it seems there are no "disused:man_made=water_well" in Berlin because we keep "man_made=water_well" in this case, but yeah, we should use it.). --Supaplex030 (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well, IMHO that would not be merely disused: but something like removed: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- I would say: No, because the water well itself is a different entity than the pump. The well (= the deep hole) is fine, but the mechanism that is put on top of the well (= the pump) is broken. An disused water well, on the other hand, would be something like the one shown in the picture: The well shaft is still there, but there is nothing to get water at all (the well shaft is covered/closed with a cap in this case). --Supaplex030 (talk) 11:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- In such cases I think that lifecycle prefix seems clearly preferably for man_made=water_well (disused:man_made=water_well ?) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)