[Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
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
> 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
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.
I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to
So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, may
be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser.
More information about the Tagging