[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Substation Refinement
francois.lacombe at telecom-bretagne.eu
Mon Sep 2 19:13:48 UTC 2013
2013/9/2 Ole Nielsen <on-osm at xs4all.nl>
> On 02/09/2013 09:58, François Lacombe wrote:
>> Ok, but 'yes' has to be added to the transformer=* table of values in
>> the proposal.
> Done, but with the recommendation to use a more specific value such as
> "distribution" if possible.
Nice. Thank you.
> You can add any kind of tags to the power pole. E.g.
> communication=antenna (don't know if this is correct)
> But it is a power pole if it looks like a power pole and was put in place
> for the purpose of carrying a power line. The other features are just
> getting a "free ride".
How can you be aware of this ?
All situations can be encountered : Both power and communications line may
had been constructed in the same time, pole could have been reinforced to
carry a power line after communication wires roll out, etc...
A pole looks like a power pole since power wires are the heaviest thing in
place. But it doesn't tell us a given pole was built to be a power pole at
This doesn't justify to put power at the top when other domains may have
the same visibility in tagging strategy.
Furthermore, we can add all tags we want for local features but the pole
will still be tagged "power" when other kind of lines are supported by it.
The question was asked a few days ago for communication poles. Should they
create a communication=pole too ?
There will be an ugly mess :(
francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging