[Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type
smz at smz.it
Thu Nov 29 11:21:21 UTC 2018
On 2018-11-29 07:27, Warin wrote:
>> * amateur_radio: antenna systems used by *licensed *radio amateurs
> A mapper will not be able to tell if they are licensed. So I would not stipulate it. And this is tagging the use, not who uses it (operator=licensed radio amateur?).
Then retract the proposal for use=amateur_radio (/and citizens_band_radio/) as radio amateurs are defined by their licensed status and you can't tell a thing about who is using an antenna by simply looking at it. And radio amateurs uses all kind of antenna through the full spectrum, ELF to TLF, and they often are at the forefront of antenna design. I also suspect you tend to confuse CB with the activity of "chatting on the radio" (/"//rag chewing" in hams parlance/). CB is a band (Citizens Band, around 27MHz), not an use, unless you (/incorrectly/) define it as "/same things hams do, but without a licens/e". Also hams make different _uses_ of their status/capabilities through their apparatus and antenna. Either you have of knowledge of the fact or you can't tell a CB antenna from an ham radio antenna on the 10m band.
> * radio: make it specific, broadcast_radio
> OK, broadcast_television too then?
At the end of the day I'd rather define them as /tv_broadcasting/ and /radio_broadcasting/. Even better /broadcasting/, tout-court, for both usages
> * navaid: VOR, LORAN (/I//think there are still some LORAN antenna around, probably disused, but conspicuous/), etc.
> Yes . possible.
> Don't think LORAN is used any more.
> VOR looks to be halved due to GPS use.
> I'll include them with a note about reducing numbers due to GPS adoption.
There are *many* very conspicuous (ex) LORAN-C antennas around the world: look at satellite images starting from the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loran-C#List_of_LORAN-C_transmitters.
There is still a lot of VOR together with other navaids such as ILS, TLS, MLS and probably many others I don't know of. Anyway VORs are not dying at all: have a look at https://www.openaip.net/navaids and https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/transition_programs/vormon/
>> * trunked_radio (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trunked_radio_system)
>> * WiMax (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX)
> No to the above 2 .. I think those are systems .. not uses?
Then why yes to WiFi? WiFi is a standard (/actually a set of standards/), same as WiMax, defining systems meant for (/broadly/) the very same usage cases, only at different scales...
> * gps: hardly noticeable. They normally are the size of small cup or a table dish at most...
> The ones I am thinking of are 300mm diameter and about 2 kg. They have choke rings around them.
> Some of these are used to provide compensation to the local GPS equipment.
> Humm there will be some use to describe the correction .. WASS if I recall correctly
The term is WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) and is a *system* (/using several type of antennas, also satellite uplink dishes/, /not only the receiving reference antenna/) for augmenting the accuracy of the GPS system for air navigation purposes (/I think the DGPS system has the same purpose but is oriented to marine navigation.../).
Yes, GNSS (/last "s" is for "system" here too.../) is a broader and more correct term compared to gps and "satnav" can do too, I guess...
Yes, sorry, antenna:band and antenna:frequency doesn't have anything to do with the current antenna:use proposal, I was just freewheeling...
I think you forgot the "satellite communication" use, which itself can be divided in some very different use (tracking, control, data up/down-link, etc..)
*At the end of the day... I think this proposal has same serious issues: the use of an antenna system can be decided only if you have internal knowledge of what it is actually used for, not just looking at the antenna. Also, either we define a very broad range of usage cases or a very fine list of them (in the hundreds, I guess...). *I'll probably vote against...*
On a broader account, do we really want OSM to become a "database of the world", with all its details/, /even fine technical details which IMHO are more fit to the blueprints of an infrastructure?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3675 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Tagging