Wow, I only asked about using the single line/minor_line distinction; if this one isn't easy at all, what will it be by adding importance or usage, which seems far less obvious than minor_line/line, itself not as obvious as I thought at first? The current disctinction has the advantage it can be discussed on the simple viewing of the whole line; on the opposite, importance and usage will not be easy to retrieve without using network managers data. Won't it be better to determine once and for all the correct usage of current tagging, than creating a new scheme which, IMHO, will add more complexity to an already complex question? Regards.
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 21:02:07 +0200 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line > > We are not talking about stop to differentiate power lines but to use > different tags to do so. > > By landscape : importance=* may support the difference between "big" > and "small" power lines. > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Importance > power=line + importance=local > power=line + importance=regional > power=line + importance=minor > power=line + importance=major > and so on > > On supports : color=*, structure=*, height=* > > By power grid function : > power=line + usage=distribution > power=line + usage=transmission > power=line + usage=traction > and so on > > I completely second what Ralph said. > The problem is also no one has really the same point of view regarding > power lines classification. > > And we are forcing people who can't/don't want to handle such a choice > between minor/major, huge/small, useful/not useful. > > > Finally, how would you tag such feature ? > https://www.google.fr/maps/@46.0051218,6.6292445,3a,75y,140.55h,108.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snMHy5MWRsC1Q39kjLUSkag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 > > cheers > > François >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
