<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Ok, let's stay in the same page then. :)<br>
Regarding schools, I don't know what you mean, because here, schools
dont have fountains, just taps and those of the bubbler type (maybe
old century schools have fountains in their yards or something
similar).<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Às 18:20 de 06/02/2020, Paul Allen
escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOJ7BYJ_d-YCZbbPGt6Hv4ePbw8FhZgQnR1b21L0QdKt6g@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">Which is the case in Britain for
ornamental/decorative fountains. Regardless
<div>of whether or not they supply drinking water, they're
fountains. But utilitarian</div>
<div>drinking fountains, of the kind found in schools, are
not "fountains" in normal</div>
<div>British English usage.<br>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This was assumed from my side since the beginning. What spurred me
to start this thread was that the element "fountain" in Portuguese
iD was translated as "decoration fountain" and the wiki seemed to
support that distinction. <br>
So, as it is now, there are no decoration fountains, only fountains
that need drinking_water=yes if they provide potable water, which
seems a more encompassing and more close to reality solution.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOJ7BYJ_d-YCZbbPGt6Hv4ePbw8FhZgQnR1b21L0QdKt6g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What I was objecting to was the idea that in some
countries amenity=fountain</div>
<div>is assumed to supply drinking water by default. It
needs an explicit</div>
<div>drinking_water=yes.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- <br>
</div>
<div>Paul</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>