Bonjour François, On 2018-12-17 11:50, François Lacombe wrote: > I own no switches. Sorry, I didn't meant to be rude in any way: I just assumed you were the one who introduced the switch=* key for power lines (/and apparently I was wrong, you just "expanded" the information about those...)/
> Separated documentation between railway switches and power switches is done > on two pages, *railway=switch* and *power=switch*, Bingo. Now try substituting the "=" sign with the ":" sign. If you do the same inside an objects description, an editor or data consumer could instantly "/route/" you to the relevant documentation when you are inspecting that particular object (/either a railway switch or a power switch/). The same could happen tomorrow for a network:switch if/when we decide to map them too. Yes, the context (/either we find the "switch" keyword inside the definition of a power line, a railway or a network/) can imply the lexical scope of the keyword, and most of the times that's self-evident for us humans, but it is a lot more difficult to /teach /to a program. > Then actuator is an attribute of several kind of objects (pipeline=valve and > eventually railway=switch), just like location. > I don't get where I confuse something between actuator=* like tags and > location=* Here is where I think you make the mistake. The actuator is _*not an attribute*_ of the things (pipeline=valve and eventually railway=switch), but a *part/element* of them. Someone someday may be wishing to further describe actuators in their own details/attributes, like now you are doing for valves which are parts/elements of a pipeline. Weight, dimensions, color, location, etc., are general attributes of whatever object. Sergio
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
