Le dim. 21 oct. 2018 à 09:21, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> a écrit :
> > > On 20. Oct 2018, at 09:03, François Lacombe <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > We all agree on necessarily classification, but the only argument in > favor of line/minor_line is they are too used to change. > > > no, the argument is that this is a basic distinction which anyone can > make, without knowing about transmission, distribution or voltage. > Line is on poles? so it is a minor line. On towers? line. > This doesn’t describe what you want to know, but it describes the visual > prominence. > Which is not true because you find poles more massive than tiny towers. That's exactly my point: currently the necessary classification is made upon subjective criterias Big... small... minor... major what does that mean? As said things aren't so binary, what about lines which are not minor nor major? >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
