On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > 2014-10-10 19:13 GMT+02:00 sabas88 <saba...@gmail.com>: > >> I use >> amenity=drinking_water + drinkable=no >> > > I agree with your own judgement that this is nonesense ;-) > IMHO we shouldn't tag like this. > > This is not really comparable to entrance=exit (as any exit physically > might be used as an entrance as well, while drinking water is about water > that is drinkable (implying more than once)). > Tagging "amenity=drinking_water + drinkable=no" makes, at least, the WeTap Android application show a false source of drinkable water. It renders on many maps indistinguishable from potable water. *I see the breakdown:* amenity=drinking_water for dogs for filling bottles for humans without bottles amenity=fountain Assumed decorative unless also tagged as drinking_water amenity=nonpotable_water with a hose size specified (e.g. MHT or GHT for the United States, BSP elsewhere) drinking_water=yes/no an attribute on something else, such as a campsite, cabin or toilet > At graveyards (the main reason for my proposal), the water can clearly be used for plant watering. > The graveyards may be vast, and this mapping actually makes sense. Because of the significant difference in outcomes to map viewers, "drinking_water" is a really poor choice. As Martin Koppenhoefer said subtagging should refine a main tag, not oppose it. I'll add that a tag should not leave the most critical element unsaid. "water_tap" leaves the issue of potability to a subtag, and that's going to lead to confusion. Far better to use "nonpotable_water". "nonpotable_water" and "drinking_water" also have no overlap, which is good. "drinking_water" and "water_tap" overlap.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging