Le mar. 16 oct. 2018 à 00:20, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> a écrit :
> So I don't see how we can make "insulated" a big deal in tagging, > defining the top-level tag, rather than being a detail to add when > known. > I agree with both of you Greg and Marc Nevertheless, this was a debate in 2013 and I was in favor to merge line, cable and minor_line https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_transmission_refinement#power.3Dminor_line_and_power.3Dminor_cable_replacement Due to power=cable and power=line usage in OSM, many contributors didn't want to mass retag power=cable. Then we all agreed on line/cable distinction in late 2014 or 2015. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_paths_refinement#Integrated_power.3Dcable Note that insulation is also a draft proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Insulation_proposal I'm still opposed to minor_line since in merge several different concept in one value, and is only useful for rendering. That said, I fully support your notion of tagging voltage, so that > low-voltage lines can be rendered only at extreme zooms, and to assume a > line is low voltage (240V seems like a reasonable default assumption in > terms of controlling rendering) if not tagged. > Great, should we open an issue on carto github to propose to lower the rendering of cables without voltage? All the best François
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
