[Tagging] Adding values to usage=* key for power transmission

Rainer Fügenstein rfu at oudeis.org
Tue Dec 2 12:02:57 UTC 2014


LS>  I agree with you if you say that “usage”
LS> sounds like a very general key and not a railway specific key. So the
LS> railway guys have just been a little faster than the power guys and
LS> “occupied” this key. I would accept this and search another key to avoid
LS> unnecessary conflicts. I don’t insist in “power:usage”. It can also be
LS> something else, but I would introduce a new key for this.

"usage" is discouraged because the railway guys already use it.
"network" is discouraged because the bus/cycle guys alread use it. if
this trend continues, we may run out of suitable words in the
english language one day.

what about "system=*" or "purpose=*"? even prefixed as "power:system",
"pipeline:system"?

cu

LS> cu

LS> Lukas Sommer

LS> 2014-12-01 23:38 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com>:

>> Hi Lukas,
>>
>> I don't like this : railway guys introduced usage without any namespace.
>> Why should power introduce one ?
>>
>> usage=* is a common tag. The proposal isn't introducing power:location
>> instead of location=* even if there is some specific values.
>>
>> Do you agree ?
>>
>> *François Lacombe*
>>
>> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
>> www.infos-reseaux.com
>> @InfosReseaux <http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux>
>>
>> 2014-12-01 9:31 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer <sommerluk at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Maybe we could use a key with a namespace: “power:usage=*” or something
>>> else. Keeping is separate from the railway usage could give us more
>>> clairity.
>>>
>>> Lukas Sommer
>>>
>>> 2014-11-24 15:24 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe <fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Rainer and thank you.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't spend time yet on the update done on the Pipeline proposal but
>>>> be sure I will.
>>>>
>>>> What were the concern against network=* tag ?
>>>> If they can be avoided with usage=* (or any common key) I'm ok to join
>>>> you to use the same between power transmission and pipelines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> *François Lacombe*
>>>>
>>>> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
>>>> www.infos-reseaux.com
>>>> @InfosReseaux <http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-11-24 15:57 GMT+01:00 Rainer Fügenstein <rfu at oudeis.org>:
>>>>
>>>>> hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> FL> I knew usage=* and it can be the ideal key to indicate
>>>>> usage=transmission,
>>>>> FL> usage=distribution,... on power lines or power cables.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I'm not mistaken, this key is intended to serve  the same purpose
>>>>> as the network=* key is in the pipeline proposal:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/PipelineExtension#Pipelines
>>>>>
>>>>> FL> But it is currently and exclusively used for railway tagging.
>>>>> FL> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:usage
>>>>>
>>>>> concerns against using the network=* key have been raised. it would
>>>>> make sense to join forces here and use a common key, be it usage=* or
>>>>> something else.
>>>>>
>>>>> cu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
 



--- NOT sent from an iPhone




More information about the Tagging mailing list