Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

3 Jul 2019, 22:18 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > > I don't have enough interest and motivation to try to fit at least four > different kinds of power-providing devices into one tag > > Note that you are not obligated to follow all (or any) suggestions. If you prefer you may make

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

Like your message (+1) marc marc Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supplyFrom: marc marc To: tagging@openstreetmap.orgCC: I think you were badly inspired when you listened to the supportersof the mega proposals that fail to pass the vote

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

I think you were badly inspired when you listened to the supporters of the mega proposals that fail to pass the vote (see history of police=* diaper=* and many other). I think the first version of your proposal was good, just focus on a new tag, without including the unfinished debate on a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

I have now canceled the proposal. I really just wanted to establish a tag for the shore power devices in front of my workplace. I don't have enough interest and motivation to try to fit at least four different kinds of power-providing devices into one tag. And I also can't think of a way to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

A couple of questions re details. You have: - capacity =* - How many sockets are available? The most common arrangement I've seen in powered camping grounds / caravan parks, is a single post with 4 power points & 4 taps, similar to this

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On 25/06/19 21:32, Michael Brandtner via Tagging wrote: I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is now to incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the same main tag. A problem I have not solved yet is how to incorporate the sub-tags of the tags

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 12:35, Michael Brandtner via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is now > to incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the same > main tag. A problem I have not solved yet is how

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is now to incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the same main tag. A problem I have not solved yet is how to incorporate the sub-tags of the tags that would be marked as deprecated  (mainly

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 11:28, Philip Barnes wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 25 June 2019, Colin Smale wrote: > > On 2019-06-25 11:33, John Sturdy wrote: > > > > > For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the > cee_blue sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On Tuesday, 25 June 2019, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2019-06-25 11:33, John Sturdy wrote: > > > For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the > > cee_blue sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than limiting it > > to one rating; this will also make it consistent

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On 2019-06-25 11:33, John Sturdy wrote: > For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the cee_blue > sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than limiting it to one > rating; this will also make it consistent with the cee_red_* sockets. Not to forget that the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the cee_blue sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than limiting it to one rating; this will also make it consistent with the cee_red_* sockets. Also, BS1363 (UK, Ireland, and quite a few other countries --- see

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On 24/06/19 01:06, Michael Brandtner via Tagging wrote: I thought this was an easy case for my first proposal. Not easy, is it. From a restricted point of view most things appear easy. It is only when a wider view is had that difficulties might be seen. And then once other mappers start to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

Note that you sure not obligated to follow all suggestions. Usually at least some suggestions are contradictory or without support or harmful. 23 cze 2019, 17:06 od tagging@openstreetmap.org: > I thought this was an easy case for my first proposal. Now I'm faced with > with comments in the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

I didn't really want to include device charging into this, but it seems that my tag is too generic to prevent that. Maybe I should stop trying to combine the power supplies at camping grounds and marinas and instead go with amenity=shorepower?  Am So., Juni 23, 2019 at 3:44 schrieb

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

On 23/06/19 01:39, Michael Brandtner via Tagging wrote: Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply The definition (wording can surely be improved): " A place where you can get electrical

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply The definition (wording can surely be improved):" A place where you can get electrical power." I've not taken into account your discussion about different