Hi Martin! 2013/4/9 Martin Vonwald <imagic....@gmail.com>
> In my opinion this looks pretty nice. You still need to update the two > examples Fukushima and Thémis - they are referring to relations and also to > roles which are nowhere defined (perimeter was dropped, plant is not > documented as role). > You're right. I've updated accordingly the proposal's page. > > This is where I still don't understand you: why do I need to specify that > a feature XXX has the role XXX? Why do I need to specify, that a generator > is a generator? A substation a substation? A dam a dam? A valve a valve? A > weir a weir? And so on. > This is just because a role must be specified. When all features must be member of power=plant relation (because of lack of perimeter), what role can I associate to a generator except... generator? > > I'm not sure if this is the best key to describe it, but I also don't have > a better one for you, so lets say: it's fine ;-) > Update is still possible until the vote begin anyway. > Finally I want to thank you for all your efforts on this topic! > Thank you for yours too. It's a real pleasure to me. Cheers. -- *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
