<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>BTW, what I incorrectly (<i>I knew it was wrong!</i>) named a
      "branch" of the tower is correctly named a "crossarm".</p>
    <p>See:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.electropedia.org/iev/iev.nsf/display?openform&ievref=466-08-12">http://www.electropedia.org/iev/iev.nsf/display?openform&ievref=466-08-12</a></p>
    <p>Cheers!</p>
    <p>Sergio</p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019-03-10 23:02, Sergio Manzi
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:f7fcd18f-2089-671d-b6e4-6e3f5273dcf4@smz.it">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <p>François,</p>
      <p>Thank-you for addressing the mistakes I outlined (<i>some still
          needs some polishing I gues</i>s), but anyway (<i>and putting
          aside my reluctance to map such things</i>) I'm afraid there
        is still something profoundly wrong with this proposal, at its
        very essence.</p>
      <p>I still don't understand what are <b>the objects</b> that one
        is expected to map with this tag.</p>
      <p>Taking as an example the first tower you depict for
        "line_attachment=suspension"
        (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Elbekreuzung_2_traversen_crop.jpg"
          moz-do-not-send="true">https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Elbekreuzung_2_traversen_crop.jpg</a>)
        what are they? The tower (<i>BTW, shouldn't it be pylon in Brit.
          Eng. ?</i>) The "<i>branch</i>" (<i>sorry, I'm missing the
          correct word...</i>) of the tower/pylon to which the insulator
        sets are suspended? The rings/hooks/bolts/nuts suspending the
        insulator sets under the "branch"? The insulator sets
        themselves? The clamps suspending the conductors under the
        insulator sets?</p>
      <p>Would it be too much asking you to edit the picture by adding a
        red arrow pointing to the object of this tag?</p>
      <p>TIA,</p>
      <p>Sergio<br>
      </p>
      <p><br>
      </p>
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019-03-10 17:54, François Lacombe
        wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAG0ygLdRD6V2htQ+jsBb4fTrUf0F93iEv63MmTHvmU5ubjJTEA@mail.gmail.com">
        <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
          charset=UTF-8">
        <div dir="ltr">
          <div dir="ltr">
            <div class="gmail_attr">Thank you for the time took to
              provide your conclusions here<br>
            </div>
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le sam. 9 mars 2019
              à 19:22, Sergio Manzi <<a href="mailto:smz@smz.it"
                moz-do-not-send="true">smz@smz.it</a>> a écrit :<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><b>A) </b><b>Scope of the
                  proposal.</b><br>
                <p>It is badly defined. The "Definition" is given as "<i>Consistently
                    defining how a power, telecom or even washing line
                    is attached to supporting pole or tower</i>", a very
                  broad definition, but then reading on I see that you
                  state that "<i>This proposal is mainly dedicated for
                    utilities network</i><i>s</i>". Which one should we
                  take? With the "mainly" adjective are you indicating
                  that you are willing to extend the scope of the
                  proposal to different application fields later on?</p>
                <p>As a matter of fact I'm convinced that a
                  generalization cannot be done in terms of tagging:
                  "attaching" a power line to a fixed infrastructure is
                  done with very different techniques from the
                  "attaching" of a washing line, the suspension line of
                  a cable car, the cables of a suspension bridge, the
                  overhead line of an electric railway (<i>and I have
                    the strong feeling tha "railways taggers" here have
                    their own ideas on how to tag their contact lines</i>),
                  etc., and therefore will require different tagging
                  schemes.</p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Since tagging is built by contributors here, yes all is
              extendable by further proposals.<br>
            </div>
            <div>It's hard to get a whole topic described in one shot so
              anyone will be able to propose more precise tagging for
              insulators for instance.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Generalisation is made upon shared concepts. Whatever
              the line is, an anchorage is still an anchorage.</div>
            <div>Additional keys can precise how the anchorage is made,
              and so on</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><b>B) </b><b>Inconsistency between the proposal name
                    and the tag name.</b></p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Solved, proposed renamed accordingly. <br>
            </div>
            <div> </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p> </p>
                <p><b>C) </b><b>Are we really talking about "Clamps"?</b><br>
                </p>
                <font face=""><font face="">The images you are attaching
                    to the definition of "suspension_clamp" and
                    "anchor_clamp" are misleading in the sense that one
                    could easily take what in reality is a "Suspension
                    insulator set" as a "Suspension clamp" and a
                    "Tension insulator set" as an "anchor clamp".</font></font></div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Right. Clamp term is removed from the proposal and
              values.</div>
            <div>As the rationale stands to share concepts between
              power, telecom or any supported line, it's out of the
              scope to define insulators sets, chains and so on.</div>
            <div>The point is to provide tags to make the distinguish
              between suspension, anchorage and shackles.<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><font face=""><font face="">The confusion is even
                      more augmented by the fact that in your proposal
                      you refer to "shackle insulators" too (IEC
                      471-03-09), and they are in a totally different
                      area of the IEC standards, "Insulators", same as
                      "pin insulators" (IEC 471-03-06).</font></font></p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Shackle insulators are the basis to define shackles and
              how they differ from suspension and anchors/tensions. <br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><font face=""><font face="">So, are we talking about
                      clamps (fittings) or about insulators (<i>or
                        insulator sets</i>) here? Because it really
                      seems</font></font><font face=""><font face="">
                      you are mixing under the same tag two very
                      different kind of objects...</font></font></p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>We are dealing with attachments, which only involve
              insulators with bare power conductors.<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><font face=""><font face="">And BTW, how could you
                      then tag "the real clamp" with its bolts and nuts
                      when it comes to it?<br>
                    </font></font></p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Keys have to be proposed for that, it's not the point
              of the current proposal.<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><font face=""><font face=""> </font></font></p>
                <p><font face=""><font face=""> </font></font></p>
                <p><font face=""><font face=""><b>D) Inaccurate wording.
                      </b>Some examples:</font></font></p>
                <ul>
                  <li><font face=""><font face="">You state that
                        "anchor_clamp" is "<i>built stronger than
                          suspension tower</i><i>s</i>". Really? A clamp
                        stronger than a tower? :-/</font></font></li>
                </ul>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>You're confused in your own reading.</div>
            <div>First sentence begins with "A support" (referring to a
              tower/pole) and second goes on with "it is", implying that
              an anchor tower is built stronger than a suspension one.</div>
            <div>Nevertheless I rephrased the whole definition as to
              make it more clear.<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <ul>
                  <li><font face=""><font face="">"<i>A shackle
                          insulator may be used to hold conductors
                          safely from their support</i>" Isn't that the
                        meaning of the life of <b>every</b> insulator?</font></font></li>
                </ul>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>... without any clamp, that's what I forgot to mention.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p><b>E) Logical mishaps</b></p>
                <p>In "Complex configuration", under the image of a pole
                  with two levels of conductors (<i>3 on the higher
                    plane, 1 below "on the right"</i><i> watching the
                    image</i>), you state that "<i>Values would go <u>from
                      right to lef</u></i><i><u>t</u> / top to down of
                    the pole while values in each section would be given
                    <u>from left to right</u> in the direction of the
                    way passing by the support node</i>". I <u>really</u>
                  don't understand what you are trying to say. Sorry for
                  asking, but right and left wouldn't just swap if I
                  watch the pole from the opposite side? (<i>and yes, as
                    others already pointed out, semicolons have a
                    different meaning in OSM tagging</i>)</p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Right, that was not clear at all and has been
              rewritten.<br>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div dir="ltr"><br>
          </div>
          <div>Regards,<br>
          </div>
          <div>François<br>
          </div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
      </blockquote>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>