[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Substation Refinement

[Ole Nielsen]

On 22/05/2013 17:26, Frank Villaro-Dixon wrote:
> 	I wonder if this level of granularity is really that useful ?
> Where's the limit ? I mean: without knowing all the complete diagram,
> all of that is a bit useless, no ?
>
> 	Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would be like changing from mapping
> only the signals/signs on the railroads to mapping each of the elements
> of the railroad such as the level-crossing sensors, speed-control
> beacons, axle counters, data pickup units, etc..
>
> 	IDK, maybe this is used somewhere (In that case, I'd love to see a
> pratical example ;) ).

Whether such detailed mapping is useful only time can tell but there are 
certainly mappers who want to add such information. From Taginfo: 
power=busbar (13795), power=switch (8591), power=transformer (8958) to 
mention the most frequently used substation component tags.
With this proposal I have tried to define the granularity at which 
substations should be mapped. For example busbars and bays should be 
mapped at the circuit level, not as individual conductors. With the 
exception of power=switch (because it is so popular) it is recommended 
not to map bay components (disconnectors, instrument transformers, surge 
arresters etc) or other fine details.

Ole N