[Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:59:41 +0200
David Marchal <penegal at live.fr> wrote:

> Thanks for the full story, Lauri. I understand now why the subject
> seems so sensitive to some. I retain from your story, if I correctly
> understood it that:* the current usage of minor_line/line is the one
> I previously suggested: use minor_line for lines mainly on poles and
> line for lines mainly on towers, with a tolerance if a line
> occasionally uses something different;* the problem of this
> modelling, which bothers some, is that it leads to a fuzzy modelling
> from a technical, power network point of view, because it doesn't
> reflect the actual usage, voltage or any technical characteristics of
> the power line;* the current usage of minor_line/line is nevertheless
> retained as it is a perceptible, beginners-friendly distinction,
> allows easy rendering, and as other essential characteristics, as
> voltage, number of cables or tower/pole shapes are already managed by
> other tags, even if some others, as the distribution/transport
> distinction, isn't modelled. Am I correct? Regards.

Yes. I would also add that power=line/minor_line distinction is highly
useful for everybody using power lines as orientation points.