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

[Rainer Fügenstein]

let me sum this up:

- loop=yes, a technical term in use and accepted by the pipeline
industry ("loop configuration"), was "voted down" in favour of a more
generic term, that can also be used in other areas (flow_direction=*).
and also not to have one more tag.

- mount=* was abandoned in favour of support=*, because it is already
in use, and also not to have one more tag.

- usage=* is discouraged, because it is already in use, causing to
have one more tag.

FL> Thus, I'm not sure we should literally add power: or railway: or whatever
FL> before usage=* since all features concerned by my proposal and railway one
FL> will be tagged with power=* or railway=*

ACK. the primary tag defines the object, and also defines the scope
(namespace) of the secondary ones. consequently, most of the secondary
ones would also have to be prefixed.

man_made=pipeline
pipeline:name=West 4
pipeline:flow_direction=both
pipeline:usage=transmission
pipeline:location=underground
...

since all four secondaries in this example are (already) in use in
other fields.

cu

FL> *François Lacombe*

FL> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
FL> www.infos-reseaux.com
FL> @InfosReseaux <http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux>

FL> 2014-12-02 13:02 GMT+01:00 Rainer Fügenstein <rfu at oudeis.org>:

>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
 



--- NOT sent from an iPhone