[Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging

Georg Feddern osm at bavarianmallet.de
Thu Feb 27 09:37:29 UTC 2014


Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty:
> i'm currently tinkering with what will be come a proposal to modify
> current hydrant tagging.
>
> my thinking is to add
>    fire_hydrant:water_source={main,pond,stream,standpipe}
> and deprecate fire_hydrant:type=pond

no objections except 'standpipe' - see below.

> then the issue is whether we want to modify fire_hydrant:type or
> replace it with a different tag altogether, say fire_hydrant:delivery
> if we keep type, should we replace pillar with plug or fire_plug or just
> let that go.

I would keep hydrant:type - because it is a physical type/design in my 
opinion.
With hydrant:delivery I would not assume the physical type, sorry.

And I would keep type=pillar.
With fire_plug I - and I suppose many others - would assume "something 
you can connect with or to".
And that are all hydrants in any design, it is too generic in my opinion.

Regarding standpipe:
I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to 
underground hydrants.
So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, may 
be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser.

Georg



More information about the Tagging mailing list