Add presets from Proposal:Power circuits routing #1744
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | ||
| { | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. please change file name (so also field code) to something like you can have also other topologies and it will be more clear where context is not obvious
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Isn't that a bit early? The only documented use so far is for power circuits (YAGNI principle) |
||
| "key": "topology", | ||
| "type": "combo", | ||
| "label": "Topology", | ||
| "strings": { | ||
| "options": { | ||
| "linear": "linear", | ||
| "branched": "branched" | ||
|
nlehuby marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | ||
| { | ||
| "icon": "iD-power-line", | ||
| "fields": [ | ||
| "name", | ||
| "ref", | ||
| "operator", | ||
| "topology", | ||
| "voltage", | ||
| "frequency", | ||
| "cables" | ||
| ], | ||
| "geometry": [ | ||
| "relation" | ||
| ], | ||
| "tags": { | ||
| "type": "power", | ||
| "power": "circuit" | ||
| }, | ||
| "reference": { | ||
| "key": "power", | ||
| "value": "circuit" | ||
| }, | ||
| "name": "Power Circuit" | ||
| } |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ | ||
| { | ||
| "icon": "iD-power-line", | ||
| "fields": [ | ||
| "name", | ||
| "ref", | ||
| "operator", | ||
| "voltage", | ||
| "cables" | ||
| ], | ||
| "geometry": [ | ||
| "relation" | ||
| ], | ||
| "tags": { | ||
| "type": "power", | ||
| "power": "line_section" | ||
| }, | ||
| "reference": { | ||
| "key": "power", | ||
| "value": "line_section" | ||
| }, | ||
| "name": "Section of Power Line" | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. I am quite confused by this, also after reading docs |
||
| } | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can it be always replaced this way?
if yes, why not do this as a bot edit rather than going through iD? Also, with 241 uses upgrading existing tagging (if that is useful and worth doing) will take comparable effort to doing PR review of that change https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/power=branch
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the same for other deprecation
note that these comments are not enabling bypassing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
if you do automated edit you must follow these rules
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In case of no further activity on this PR it will be closed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
According to the proposal page:
power=branchis to replace by power=circuit and case by case requiredpower=line_sectionrelationstype=route+route=poweris to replace bytype=power+power=circuitFor my part, I don't plan on making any large-scale, automatic changes. I think it’s up to the local communities interested in this topic to take on this issue, and some have already started doing so on their own perimeter. In particular, regarding the
power=branchcase, they seem to have been introduced mainly as part of an import project I know nothing about, so I certainly won’t be changing anything.I simply suggest using the existing feature in the iD editor to notify contributors who might edit the object that this is no longer the correct way to label it, and to prevent new contributors from creating new objects with these tags. From what I understand, this is exactly what the feature in iD is meant to do, but if you don't think it's reasonable, I'll remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please, do it
in my view this is effectively doing "large-scale, automatic changes" as at least some users press "update tags" blindly
and if these tags can be mass-transformed then it should be done with bot edit, not some manual distributed one
As disclaimer: yes, in past this deprecation feature was used and intended to be used differently, and I am effectively trying to change it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So sorry for any confusion here - and yes, situation partially changed over say last year.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok, it's done.