[Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

[Ilari Kajaste]

On 13 July 2012 18:49, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> interestingly drinkable is mostly used for water that is NOT drinkable:
> no  1614  68.80%
> yes  689  29.37%
>
> while drinking_water is mostly used for drinking water:
> yes  296  44.85%
> no  230    34.85%
> Yes 78    11.82%

This isn't all that surprising. "drinkable" is an attribute,
"drinking_water" is a service. Different types of things are used in
different tagging contexts.

That is also a good argument in opposition to combining those two.

> IMHO they are not exactly the same but so close that they are probably
> interchangeable most of the currently tagged objects.

But that's not the only angle to consider, it's also relevant that the
tagging process makes sense to the tagger. Attributes and services are
different things, so it's not just a matter of deciding the better
term (e.g. "drinkable" vs. "potable").

I'm not saying it's not a good idea to suggest the use of only one tag
instead of two that are used to convey the same result ("ok there's
probably water for me there"), But the issue isn't simple.

-- 
    - Ilari Kajaste -

E-Mail: ilari.kajaste at iki.fi
WWW: http://iki.fi/ilari.kajaste