[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Charging station
bryce2 at obviously.com
Thu Aug 18 19:48:24 BST 2011
That's more like it!
Really what's critical here is no so much that it's a charging station,
but rather than the presence of the compatible plug.
And if you flip it around, each fuel type could start gathering other
USB-Micro-B:note=Located near the telephones
Thus you could have a parking lot or a toilet that offers charging....
in addition to the more common (and more likely to be shown on a map)
fueling or charging stations.
I would definitely vote no on the proposal until a standard dictionary
of fuel / charging plug types is kept.
On 08/17/2011 02:13 PM, Jonas Tull wrote:
> That would be the two major drawbacks with the current proposal:
> A. No possibility to have several plug types at the same node.
> B. No clear way of sharing a node with amenity=fuel.
> A: The the same scheme as for "liquid" fuels could be used (i.e.
> fuel:e85=yes/no, fuel:diesel=yes/no, et.cet). Something like
> "charging_station:plug:VDE-AR-E-2623-2-2=yes/no" would be nice, and
> easy to expand with "charging_station:battery:AAA"...
> B: Data miners and alikes should be able to gather info regarding
> charging facilities from a amenity=fuel if it has tags matching
> "charging_station:*". The other way around would of course also be
> possible, if an charging_station also offers something like fuel:e85.
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:06, Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com
> <mailto:bryce2 at obviously.com>> wrote:
> For charging stations it seems exceptionally important to define
> the plug style
> available. A charging station with the wrong plug is just as
> useful as a gas station
> offering only nuclear fuel pellets.
> The trick is to standardize on names for each of the various
> charging paddle styles,
> and also allow for multiple types at one location.
> -Bryce Nesbitt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging