Le mar. 14 janv. 2020 à 01:33, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > Debate is open about route=power which may be replaced by a more > meaningful tag (power=circuit for instance) > > +1 to this idea of power=circuit. And then use "type=power" instead of > "type=route" if you make a relation, This is a point of the whole debate and, why not type=power + power=circuit. But i'm merely against power=circuit_segment and independent relations for branch and trunk. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal#Advanced_cases:_branching According to experience in France, a single relation involving all lines and substations with appropriate roles (trunk, branch, whatever) is enough and doesn't force to create several relations. This point have to be cleared with proposal authors prior to vote. > or if the circuit is less than a > few hundred nodes you could just use a linear way. > I don't get that point. Circuits need to be a relation. A single way can't do the job since you have two substations to involve at least. All the best
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
