19 Dec 2018, 22:24 by ricoz@gmail.com:
> the OSM tag chain should be imho used only for very common things because
> each member
> of the chain will turn up as a "top level" tag in the database and taginfo.
> If used extensively for attributes I would consider it polution of the
>
Good, thank-you!
I wasn't aware of that, but I'm not an EE and that's why I've asked to ask one:
this kind of things are much better handled by experts in the field.
But anyway I have the strong feeling that that wasn't the meaning the person
who described transformers had in is head:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:36, Sergio Manzi wrote:
The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting
> part and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK.
>
Power transformers can have tertiary windings:
That's about windings, and of course in the primary of a 3 phase transformer
you'll generally (/there are exceptions.../) have 3 windings, but those 3
windings together make up the primary side of the transformer.
The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting part
and
On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:00:20PM +0100, Sergio Manzi wrote:
I *never *heard of a transformer's /tertiary/, thus: try asking an
electrical engineer...
In general, a transformer can have 1..N primary windings and 1..N
secondary windings:
Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:53 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi :
> ... unless we start putting columns (":") into keys according to a
> different logic.
>
it really doesn't matter, unless we would actually need those namespaces
(i.e. they would collide by using the exact same string on the left side,
... unless we start putting columns (":") into keys according to a different
logic.
On 2018-12-20 11:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Claudius Henrichs
> mailto:claudiu...@gmx.de>>:
>
> It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how
Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Claudius Henrichs <
claudiu...@gmx.de>:
> It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how namespaces
> are defined as a model in information technology and remaining economically
> shorter to be readable to humans. And there's not much of a
: "Sergio Manzi"
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces
François,
The discussion about this has also been brought to the forum, here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64825
I'm unsure if it is better to continue it here
François,
The discussion about this has also been brought to the forum, here:
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64825
I'm unsure if it is better to continue it here in the ML, there in the forum,
or in both places...
On 2018-12-20 01:04, François Lacombe wrote:
>
> Le mer. 19
Le mer. 19 déc. 2018 à 22:26, Richard a écrit :
> the OSM tag chain should be imho used only for very common things because
> each member
> of the chain will turn up as a "top level" tag in the database and
> taginfo.
>
We are using such chains in Power, Pipeline and Telecom groups. It works
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:20:35PM +0100, Claudius Henrichs wrote:
> I couldnt be happier to have the "Benefits of namespaces" discussion
> happening right now on this ML.
>
> I am about to finalize a tagging proposal for a new sub-tag. I am wondering
> about the pros and cons of the
Visible now! :-)
On 2018-12-19 03:30, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> Thank-you Claudius,
>
> I've posted an answer in the forum, but I'm afraid it is awaiting for
> moderation (I'm new to the forum...).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sergio
>
>
> On 2018-12-18 22:20, Claudius Henrichs wrote:
>> I couldn't be happier
I couldn't be happier to have the "Benefits of namespaces" discussion happening right now on this ML.
I am about to finalize a tagging proposal for a new sub-tag. I am wondering about the pros and cons of the traditional "OSM tag chain" (foo=bar + bar=baz) versus "Laymans namespacing" (foo=bar +
Am 17.12.2018 um 13:01 schrieb Paul Allen:
> ..
>
> This isn't theoretical speculation. The author of iD has, in the
> past, expressed unhappiness
> about such re-usability.
> ...
This is a specific to iD and not a general concern, and simply has to do
with that in a lot of cases iD doesn't
Thanks, me too! :-)
If you are interested in this kind of things, have a look at the following
(/not an exaustive list of topics, just a random one.../):
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Name
*
Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 14:26, Sergio Manzi a écrit :
> 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...)*
>
Me neither, switch=* was
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...)/
>
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:25 AM François Lacombe
wrote:
>
> I still think that actuator=* is better than two pipeline:valve:actuator=*
> and railway:switch:actuator=* because the first is really more concise and
> reusable between valves and railway switches.
> Like I don't like
Hi Sergio,
Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 02:38, Sergio Manzi a écrit :
> Now, for the reasons for namespacing and just as an example (*it is not
> the only good reason...*), think about documentation: the documentation
> for describing a power switch should not be intermixed with the
> documentation
BTW, if that's not clear:
* railway:switch describe/is an *object*
* fire_hydrant:position describe/is an *attribute *of the fire_hydrant
object, for which, you are right, location=* would had been correct.
On 2018-12-17 02:36, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> You are mixing correct namespacing
Sorry, I meant to say:
the documentation describing *railway switches* should not be intermixed with
the documentation describing power switches
On 2018-12-17 02:36, Sergio Manzi wrote:
> the documentation for describing a power switch should not be intermixed with
> the documentation
Hello,
You are mixing correct namespacing (like railway:switch) with... mistaken
namespacing (like hydrant:position).
Now, for the reasons for namespacing and just as an example (/it is not the
only good reason.../), think about documentation: the documentation for
describing a power switch
Hi
Interesting thread about namespacing in tag names.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Pipeline_valves_proposal#Use_namespace_or_not
Spoiler: no consensus shows up at the end.
I still think that actuator=* is better than two pipeline:valve:actuator=*
and
24 matches
Mail list logo
