[Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

Fran├žois Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Thu Aug 17 16:59:28 UTC 2017


Hi Moritz,

2017-08-17 14:50 GMT+02:00 Moritz <osm at moritzmueller.ee>:

>
> Ok, my understanding is you want to have only to categories:
>
> * Pressurized water sources (fire hydrants)
> * "dry" hydrants where a pump has to be brought to get water ("dry"
> hydrants or suction points or whatever tag it will be)
>

Not only 2, but I don't like to make the distinguish in the "primary" key.
This may be a key with a specific key, like water_source which is used in
the proposal
As a firefighter you'll be able to avoid water_source=pond, river or
whatever which isn't pressurized if you didn't bring a pump.


>
>> Pressurized or not, there are connectorized pipes wich allow firefighters
>> to get water which have a given appearance on ground (barrel, underground,
>> pipe...)
>> Even if it's not always pressurized, the design of such things is done as
>> to allow the water to flow under pressure (gravity, pumped or whatever)
>> and
>> that's why I like to think "dry" and "pressurized" "hydrants" are all
>> members of the same set of feature.
>>
>
> Then we should not call it hydrant, because the hydrant (by the meaning of
> the word) is something connected
> to the water main ;)
>

Why not :)
But as a not English native I won't argue on hydrant sense.
It would be great to have a common term grouping all water supplies
emergency=water_supply ?

Many people will ask why they should map it as emergency=suction_point
whereas there is a similar red barrel 20m away mapped as
emergency=fire_hydrant


>
> Otherwise, you have ponds, wells, which are open field water sources
>>
>
> But "dry" hydrants are always connected to other water sources like ponds,
> wells, water_tanks.
> They are not isolated things on the field. So you have the "dry" hydrant
> which is next to a pond/lake/etc. and
> connected to it.
>

Yes, and this source can simply be given with water_source key
And ponds, wells, tanks can be mapped independently

When I said suctions points were places, I assumed that it referred more to
the platform than to the pipe
But it's only my point of view.


>
> When I'm understanding you right, you propose to put dry hydrants into
> same category like real hydrants.
> Because the mappers can't distinguish between real and dry hydrants.
> But then the problem what to do with the other variants of suction points
> (e.g. wells) persists.
> Here in Germany there are wells which can look like dry hydrants. So the
> unexperienced mappers would put them
> also in the hydrants category, according to your above statement.
>

Then the well is different from the "hydrant". The mapper should put at
least 2 different features on the map.
With my previous example, I've put 2 features : the "hydrant" and the well
(or the reservoir, let's say it's a well for the example)
Here is the well: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/516436569
And the "hydrant" inside the area (or next to):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4936126869



> This leads to no or little value of these information for the
> firefighters. When I have to decide where to get water
> for the fire engine, I try to avoid using wells, ponds, lakes in first
> place. Just because the hazzle to get water
> quickly is much bigger than just connecting the hose to the hydrant.
>

I agree for the low value for firefighters.
BUT, as mentioned in the Proposal Talk page: water intakes is a concern for
many people. Even fishermen can be interested by occasional water taking in
rivers or ponds.
That's why if OSM encourage mappers to map hydrants and sources, this will
be better if it's done widely.


>
> You mean you disagree on on using something like suction_point:source=*
> and suction_point:position=* to further describe
> the features of a given suction point/dry hydrant?
>
Yes
I prefer location=* to suction_point:position or fire_hydrant:position for
instance.


> How would you attach the additional attributes to such a
> dry_hydrant/suction point when you just have 2 categories for more then 2
> items to be distinguished?
>

I'm not sure to properly understand. Do you refer to the distinguish of
"dry" vs pressurized ?
water_source=* and other keys like that can help us, don't you ?


>
> But I agree that we will somehow end up improving the tagging of
> hydrants/dry hydrants and stuff ;)
>

That's nice, I'm sure too

All the best

Fran├žois
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170817/4895f5dd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list