Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 09:53 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> I do not believe > anymore that man_made=water_tap should be deprecated but rather > redefined to only describe the tap of a fountain and not the whole > fountain. > this is not a redefinition, it is already like this. man_made=water_tap describes a water tap. > *Proposal summary* > > amenity=fountain describes both decorative fountains and utility > fountains, such as drinking fountains, small fountains for washing > clothes, fountains to clean people or provide water to animals; this > would not include large facilities with one single scope in mind: for > example a building where people go to wash clothes would not fall under > this tag. > a feature for washing clothes for me is not a "fountain", it is a lavoir, a laundry sink, or something similar. I do not understand what "fountains to clean people" are, could you give an example? > > Introduction of the key fountain:style=* that accepts as values all the > ones currently listed in the wiki as "Specific types of drinking water > fountains"; translation of the definition of all those fountains to > fountain=drinking, fountain:style=*. > the word "style", if used in opposition to "type", suggests something like "fashion" to me, or art/architectural epoche style (e.g. art deco, modern, post-modern, renaissance, barocco, etc.) > > Introduction of the key tap=yes, used to describe if the flow of a > fountain can be controlled by the user. > is already introduced > > Introduction of the generic value fountain=decorative, that ensures the > fountain is decorative. > it is already introduced, 953 instances as of now, but actually it may create problems for example in the case of a "decorative drinking fountain", and because "decorative" is not clearly defined. Maybe this situation could be improved. > > Introduction of the generic value fountain=utility, that describes the > fountain as non-decorative. > yet another generic type, even more generic then "drinking"? > > Deprecation of fountain=drinking_fountain in favour of fountain=drinking. > this alternative tagging is just a temporary hickup which will wash out automatically I guess, but we could try to speed it up. > > The idea is that fountains not covered by the current values can still > be tagged as either decorative or utility even if a specific tag does > not exist. > my suggestion would be to have other generic values, but slightly more specific than "utility", to cover the cases that are not yet covered by the documented values. > > You can propose other values for fountain=* but I guess those will come > with time anyway, since the idea is to make this easily extensible. > the benefit of documenting key/values is that the chance is bigger that everybody uses the same or similar definitions for the same key. Keep in mind that having 2 tags for the exactly same thing is not a big deal, it is almost no problem at all, it can be interpreted without problems and the effort to deal with both is almost not existent (and automatic retagging could be performed without problems). On the other hand, people using the same tag for (also only slightly) different things, is a huge problem and leads to ambiguity and cannot be solved automatically, all instances have to looked at again > > > I would propose the deprecation of the value fountain=stone_block since > it could be tagged as fountain=driking, material=stone. no it cannot. There are many fountains made of stone, but not all them are instances of "stone block". > This tag impedes > tagging the fountain with a specific value in order to describe its > material. > > > I'm unsure whether fountain=bottle_refill should be kept. > > In the wiki it is decribed by this image: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fairmont_Sonoma_Mission_Inn_August_2019_-_Sarah_Stierch_09.jpg > > The water does not come through pipes, but from a nearby water > container. I'd rather tag it as its own amenity. > I agree with this. These machines are no "fountains" for me, neither the indoor versions, nor their rugged outdoor sisters. Regarding the proposal: I would not make a big proposal package which aims at changing all the things you mention, rather I would suggest to make distinct proposals for each of these changes. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
