Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
Hi, On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Seth Golub wrote: > Hello. I'm mapping the fire alarm boxes in my neighborhood, and I'm not > sure how to tag them. Here's an example: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/dwthompson/36722209 77/ > The closest thing I can find in use is emergency=phone, but these are just > switches. You pull the lever to summon help, but you can't talk to anyone. > My first guess would be emergency=alarm, but taginfo hasn't seen that. Just > two of amenity=fire_alarm, one amenity=fire_alarm_box, and one > service=alarm. Am I really the first one doing this or is there another > scheme I haven't thought to look for? I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. -- martijn van exel schaaltreinen.nl ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel wrote: > I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify > maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. > The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency > services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. I didn't see any phone, just appears to have a switch you pull to trigger an alarm. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On 4 June 2011 17:10, John Smith wrote: > On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify >> maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. >> The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency >> services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. > > I didn't see any phone, just appears to have a switch you pull to > trigger an alarm. > I didn't read the text below, I'm assuming that PD is for police. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:10 AM, John Smith wrote: > On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify >> maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. >> The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency >> services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. > > I didn't see any phone, just appears to have a switch you pull to > trigger an alarm. > I'm sorry, I misunderstood - you're saying *your* fire alarms don't have two-way communication. emergency=phone is misleading then, as it implies two-way communication. emergency=alarm would be my intuitive choice too, then. -- martijn van exel schaaltreinen.nl ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On 4 June 2011 17:44, Martijn van Exel wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:10 AM, John Smith wrote: >> On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel wrote: >>> I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify >>> maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. >>> The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency >>> services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. >> >> I didn't see any phone, just appears to have a switch you pull to >> trigger an alarm. >> > I'm sorry, I misunderstood - you're saying *your* fire alarms don't > have two-way communication. > emergency=phone is misleading then, as it implies two-way > communication. emergency=alarm would be my intuitive choice too, then. We don't have anything like that here, I was just going off the photo, it seems from the description it would be an emergency phone for someone wanting police, but just a dumb switch for fire. As for tagging, emergency:police=phone, emergency:fire=switch maybe? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
Hi I think this is best: emergency=phone vs emergency=switch or emergency=alarm this describes clearly the difference between one-way and two-way communication. If you want to be more specific about the service that is alarmed, you could use something like phone=police or switch=fire or alarm=fire (depending on the previous choice) This schema is also compatible with the previous (with just emergency=phone) and you can be more specific if you want. I don't know which one of the two (alarm or switch) is best to use: you phone with a phone but you alarm with a switch. So using alarm or switch is pretty much a free choice. regards, Sander 2011/6/4 John Smith > On 4 June 2011 17:44, Martijn van Exel wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:10 AM, John Smith > wrote: > >> On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel wrote: > >>> I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify > >>> maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing. > >>> The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency > >>> services' so it is not necessarily restricted to switches. > >> > >> I didn't see any phone, just appears to have a switch you pull to > >> trigger an alarm. > >> > > I'm sorry, I misunderstood - you're saying *your* fire alarms don't > > have two-way communication. > > emergency=phone is misleading then, as it implies two-way > > communication. emergency=alarm would be my intuitive choice too, then. > > We don't have anything like that here, I was just going off the photo, > it seems from the description it would be an emergency phone for > someone wanting police, but just a dumb switch for fire. > > As for tagging, emergency:police=phone, emergency:fire=switch maybe? > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
Thanks for your help. Sorry, that photo did not give a clear story. Many of these boxes just have a switch that calls the fire department. No phone of any kind. http://www.flickr.com/photos/csaulit/5236469068/ Some also have a locked phone that is accessible only to police. This must have been handy before they all carried radios, but it's hard to imagine anyone using one now. (At least, they say they contain for-police-only phones, but I've never seen one open.) http://www.flickr.com/photos/ohciel/4661360495/ The inaccessible police phone are interesting from a historical perspective, but are not useful. (Maybe include a note, but not a phone tag...) As far as emergency devices go, it's all about the fire alarm switch. So I guess I will use emergency=alarm and perhaps also operator=SF Fire Department Would it be appropriate to add something to the wiki? Proposed feature? Added to the list in Key:emergency? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
Normally you should start a proposal. I think you can immediately start with the voting stadium since there is not much to discuss about these tags. There are just an extension to the current schema and are perfectly backwards compatible. If you created the proposal. Do send a mail to this list with as subject "[VOTING] emergency=alarm", this is the official way to start a voting procedure and make the tag valid. After the voting, it should be added to the wiki. Adding it directly to the wiki is not advisable since it's not used yet. regards, Sander 2011/6/5 Seth Golub > Thanks for your help. > > Sorry, that photo did not give a clear story. Many of these boxes just > have a switch that calls the fire department. No phone of any kind. > http://www.flickr.com/photos/csaulit/5236469068/ > > Some also have a locked phone that is accessible only to police. This must > have been handy before they all carried radios, but it's hard to imagine > anyone using one now. (At least, they say they contain for-police-only > phones, but I've never seen one open.) > http://www.flickr.com/photos/ohciel/4661360495/ > > The inaccessible police phone are interesting from a historical > perspective, but are not useful. (Maybe include a note, but not a phone > tag...) As far as emergency devices go, it's all about the fire alarm > switch. > > So I guess I will use > emergency=alarm > and perhaps also > operator=SF Fire Department > > Would it be appropriate to add something to the wiki? Proposed feature? > Added to the list in Key:emergency? > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
Am 05.06.2011 14:31, schrieb Sander Deryckere: > Normally you should start a proposal. +1 > I think you can immediately start > with the voting stadium since there is not much to discuss about these > tags. -1 > There are just an extension to the current schema and are > perfectly backwards compatible. > > If you created the proposal. Do send a mail to this list with as subject > "[VOTING] emergency=alarm", this is the official way to start a voting > procedure and make the tag valid. After the voting, it should be added > to the wiki. The following has nothing to do with the discussed feature, but I wonder why many people try to force the approval of a tag by fast votes on the wiki. A tag gets approved by uses in the data and software handling it. As a proposal you can almost added it the same way on the wiki as a approved tag and you can change anything that might not work or find a better solution while testing. > Adding it directly to the wiki is not advisable since it's not used yet. You can always create a proposal and link to it on the wiki. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On 5 June 2011 23:58, fly wrote: > As a proposal you can almost added it the same way on the wiki as a > approved tag and you can change anything that might not work or find a > better solution while testing. I've done this in the past and set the status to defacto, rather than approved. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 15:58 +0200, fly wrote: > I wonder why many people try to force the approval of a tag by fast > votes on the wiki. A tag gets approved by uses in the data and software > handling it. Which raises another point, that if you really want to get your proposal accepted more rapidly and widely, its probably worth throwing in some examples of how to patch common software to work with the tag (sample chunk to add to elemstyles for example). Its one thing to ask that software handles it, but its another to write the code to actually make it do it. In my experience, developers prefer the latter. > > Adding it directly to the wiki is not advisable since it's not used yet. If he adds it to the wiki, and creates a few instances of it, then is it still 'not used yet'? If he simply adds to the wiki without adding any data your point would be valid, but if he creates the tags then documents them, wheres the problem? Its better than so many other undocumented tags others have used. David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] fire alarms
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:58 PM, fly wrote: >I wonder why many people try to force the approval of a tag by fast >votes on the wiki. A tag gets approved by uses in the data and software >handling it. I find it remarkable that after however many years of OSM's existence, statements like this are, sadly enough, kind of true. If the highest level of evolution of a software ecosystem is standards governed by a managed change process, then what we have here is the lowest: no standards, no organised processes, and the only definition of what tags are accepted is whatever random pieces of software happen to arbitrarily support them, in whatever way they judge fit. And, based on my analysis[1], the end result is pretty messy indeed. The situation described in this statement is not an aspirational goal. It's the current quagmire that we all face, and should be trying to find a way out of. Steve [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Stevage/tagsupport ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
