On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 08:21, Paul Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 at 22:50, François Lacombe <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Thats a detail, official document stands for International Protection >> https://texa-co.ir/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/IEC-60529.pdf (see §4 page >> 18) >> > > You're right. I've only ever encountered "IP" expanded as Ingress > Protection, which makes > sense. >
It requires at least a strong context to not be confused with any other >> protection classification system. >> > > To be honest, I'd not expect a national park to be protected from liquid > or particulate ingress, > nor an electrical enclosure to impose restrictions on building houses > within it. Nor do I expect > even micro-mappers to document the IP rating of electrical enclosures they > map. The only > thing we really need to worry about is namespace collision, and that's > usually dealt with by > a first-come/first-served approach. > I've just had a quick play on TagInfo & protect_class & protection_title, plus a couple of others, all refer to protected areas of one type or another > If he can't, then anyone who needs to map the International > Protection rating of electrical enclosures will have to come up with a > different tag. :) > How about reserving IP_class or IP_protection? Would seem to cover it nicely (especially if they're not actually used!) Thanks Graeme
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
