LS> I agree with you if you say that usage LS> sounds like a very general key and not a railway specific key. So the LS> railway guys have just been a little faster than the power guys and LS> occupied this key. I would accept this and search another key to avoid LS> unnecessary conflicts. I dont insist in power:usage. It can also be LS> something else, but I would introduce a new key for this.
"usage" is discouraged because the railway guys already use it. "network" is discouraged because the bus/cycle guys alread use it. if this trend continues, we may run out of suitable words in the english language one day. what about "system=*" or "purpose=*"? even prefixed as "power:system", "pipeline:system"? cu LS> cu LS> Lukas Sommer LS> 2014-12-01 23:38 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe <fl.infosrese...@gmail.com>: >> Hi Lukas, >> >> I don't like this : railway guys introduced usage without any namespace. >> Why should power introduce one ? >> >> usage=* is a common tag. The proposal isn't introducing power:location >> instead of location=* even if there is some specific values. >> >> Do you agree ? >> >> *François Lacombe* >> >> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com >> www.infos-reseaux.com >> @InfosReseaux <http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux> >> >> 2014-12-01 9:31 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer <sommer...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Maybe we could use a key with a namespace: power:usage=* or something >>> else. Keeping is separate from the railway usage could give us more >>> clairity. >>> >>> Lukas Sommer >>> >>> 2014-11-24 15:24 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe <fl.infosrese...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Hi Rainer and thank you. >>>> >>>> I didn't spend time yet on the update done on the Pipeline proposal but >>>> be sure I will. >>>> >>>> What were the concern against network=* tag ? >>>> If they can be avoided with usage=* (or any common key) I'm ok to join >>>> you to use the same between power transmission and pipelines. >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> *François Lacombe* >>>> >>>> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com >>>> www.infos-reseaux.com >>>> @InfosReseaux <http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux> >>>> >>>> 2014-11-24 15:57 GMT+01:00 Rainer Fügenstein <r...@oudeis.org>: >>>> >>>>> hi, >>>>> >>>>> FL> I knew usage=* and it can be the ideal key to indicate >>>>> usage=transmission, >>>>> FL> usage=distribution,... on power lines or power cables. >>>>> >>>>> If I'm not mistaken, this key is intended to serve the same purpose >>>>> as the network=* key is in the pipeline proposal: >>>>> >>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/PipelineExtension#Pipelines >>>>> >>>>> FL> But it is currently and exclusively used for railway tagging. >>>>> FL> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:usage >>>>> >>>>> concerns against using the network=* key have been raised. it would >>>>> make sense to join forces here and use a common key, be it usage=* or >>>>> something else. >>>>> >>>>> cu >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> --- NOT sent from an iPhone _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
