I looked at the actual proposal and I think on the Talk page here is a problem I see. You write:
Since power <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power>=converter <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dconverter> isn't compatible with building <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building> =* (a converter is a device and building isn't), it's less possible and desirable to use building <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building> =* + power <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power>=converter <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dconverter> + note <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:note>=There should be several converters in this building <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:note%3DThere_should_be_several_converters_in_this_building&action=edit&redlink=1>. How could we feed a reliable QA test with a free text note? Fanfouer <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Fanfouer> (talk <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Fanfouer>) 23:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC) I disagree with the premise. There is no confict at all between building=* and power=*. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142321228 for a typical case. This is a very typical situation where there is "stuff inside" the building. In this case, it's a single-use building -- a power converter building. Yes there are one or more devices inside the building, but that doesn't change the building's single use. So no need for guessing where nodes might be needed inside the building for the converter device(s). Just tag the building itself. (And there doesn't have to be a building -- if it's outdoors, just tag the enclosing area.) If you learn more about the nature of the converters, you could (for example) have a tag like "converter:count=3". By the way, your last example: A traction substation in Paris designed with three 63kV AC outdoor transformers and with DC converters inside the building (we don't know how many of them). The railway runs with 1500 Volts DC. No tag specifies the output voltage in your example. As I read other related pages, I think it should be tagged: voltage:primary=63000 voltage:secondary=1500 Cheers, John On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 5:07 PM Johnparis <ok...@johnfreed.com> wrote: > I agree with Marc that you should never "create nodes at a random position > with the equipment to avoid the tag for the characteristic". If you place a > node, it should reflect as closely as possible the actual position, > although if the position is uncertain, it's typical in OSM to place a node > rather than an area (closed way). If it's just a sheer guess, however, the > node should be avoided. And if there are "a lot of these things here", then > that argues even more strongly for making it a characteristic of the > enclosing area, rather than a node. Think of hotel rooms -- rather than > mapping each room (as an area or, shudder, a node), you simply tag the > hotel with "rooms=35". > > As to the example of a bus shelter with a bench, I personally favor making > it a characteristic of the shelter (as Marc suggests), rather than placing > a separate node, because the bench would not exist except for the shelter. > If there is a bench NEAR the shelter, but outside of it, I would make that > a separate node. But that is my personal preference, I occasionally > encounter shelters mapped as areas with nodes for benches inside. It's not > my style, but on the other hand I don't change it if someone else has done > it. I do add the "bench=yes" tag, however, to the shelter itself, as that's > useful for people searching for shelters-with-benches. > > In general, I try to think of a typical end-user case. What will make OSM > most helpful for the person who wants to use it? (not: what will make > things easiest for the mapper?) > > John > > > > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 4:46 PM François Lacombe <fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Thank you two for the elaborated answers >> >> I agree that currently many mapping practices split sites and devices. >> Then the idea should spread as to not get in arguments like the one in >> the proposal. >> >> Nevertheless I have comments regarding Marc examples : >> * " bin/shelter/bench=yes on a bus stop for this equipment is present >> in the area of the bus stop" >> Shouldn't we put a node inside the bus-stop shelter area to materialize >> the bin or the bench? >> * lit=yes on an highway feature properly indicates kind of "process" >> without be redundant with individual street lights lighting the road >> This is exactly with I propose for traction substations, mapping process >> on sites and devices independently. >> >> Things are better than I thought. >> Then, it would be good to amend the 1 feature=1 osm object page with more >> clear messages (and examples) >> All of this discussion only cover sites mapped as areas. We can start by >> stating that a particular device on the ground should get its own object >> instead of being moved to enclosing building/site/place ? >> This is not possible to distinguish sites from devices at the moment they >> are located on a single node. >> >> All the best >> >> François >> >> Le sam. 8 juin 2019 à 01:06, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> a >> écrit : >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Le 07.06.19 à 19:08, François Lacombe a écrit : >>> > a need to distinguish sites and devices in our tagging. >>> >>> making a difference between a characteristic of a site and the device >>> providing that characteristic is already what we do for many objects. >>> below are some examples. >>> I find it quite logical and useful to inform therefore that a site >>> has a feature with another tag than the device of this feature. >>> in that sense I find your proposal quite coherent. >>> I completely disagree with the idea of a comment on the proposal >>> to create nodes at a random position with the equipment to avoid >>> the tag for the characteristic. of course, >>> it's better to be able to map each device separately, but not >>> by inventing their position and number just to need one less tag >>> >>> some exemples : >>> bin/shelter/bench=yes on a bus stop for this equipment is present >>> in the area of the bus stop >>> bar=yes on a POI to say that there is a bar in the area of the POI >>> lit=yes on a road to say that there are lighting devices nearby. >>> tactile_paving on the node of a pedestrian crossing to indicate >>> that there is a tactile_paving at the intersection of the pedestrian >>> path and the kerb >>> toilets and toilets:wheelchair on a POI >>> >>> Regards, >>> Marc >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
