Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 14:26, Sergio Manzi <s...@smz.it> 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 firstly de facto used and then documented on wiki with a proposal. > Bingo. Now try substituting the "=" sign with the ":" sign > This would be redundant with railway=switch and power=switch :) Be sure I'll be blamed for that just like I'm blame to don't use namespaces. > If you do the same inside an objects description, an editor or data > consumer could instantly "*route*" you to the relevant documentation when > you are inspecting that particular object (*either a railway switch or a > power switch*). > Editors like JOSM have context=x" concept to make the distinction. https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/TaggingPresets#Attributes JOSM maintainers told me they prefer actuator=* as it's more simpler to type and users don't have to be annoyed with that. I understand that editors have more work to do to deal with such generic keys, but editors should help users and not the contrary shouldn't you ? > Yes, the context (*either we find the "switch" keyword inside the > definition of a power line, a railway or a network*) can imply the > lexical scope of the keyword, and most of the times that's self-evident for > us humans, but it is a lot more difficult to *teach *to a program. > That's not so clear depending on which editor maintainer you ask. Processors have to deal with tags associations, namespaces won't prevent them to be smart anyway i'm affraid. > Then actuator is an attribute of several kind of objects (pipeline=valve > and eventually railway=switch), just like location. > I don't get where I confuse something between actuator=* like tags and > location=* > > Here is where I think you make the mistake. > > The actuator is *not an attribute* of the things (pipeline=valve and > eventually railway=switch), but a *part/element* of them. > > Someone someday may be wishing to further describe actuators in their own > details/attributes, like now you are doing for valves which are > parts/elements of a pipeline. > Currently it is an actual attribute for sake of simplicity for contribution and inventory, because we consider the system {valve + actuator}. Then in eventual future, we will need another node to separate the actuator from the valve and a way connecting the valve and the actuator to map the mechanical link. That should be done for transformers on top of poles, antennas on top of a mast, windows on a given house and so on... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element By the way I apreciate the discussion and this certainly improve the knowledge about tagging possibilities and principles. François
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
