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 <[email protected]>: > 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 <[email protected]>: > >> 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 >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
