[Tagging] fire hydrants

François Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Tue Jul 4 19:12:56 UTC 2017

2017-07-04 18:15 GMT+02:00 marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>:

> Le 04. 07. 17 à 17:14, François Lacombe a écrit :
> > I still have some comments :
> > * fire_hydrant:couplings:type may only be fire_hydrant:couplings without
> > the :type suffix
> > * fire_hydrant:type really should be fire_hydrant only. I don't get the
> > benefit of adding :type here (feel free to give me hints)
> With fire_hydrant:couplings, you have to guess what this means.

Without reading the wiki, somebody can tag fire_hydrant:couplings=yes or
> fire_hydrant:couplings=2 for exemple.
> Sata will be of lower quality

Hi Marc, I got your point
I'd say it's a matter of tags, presets, QA, guidance, not only of this
particular proposal
Even if contributors will know it's about the type of coupling, they will
defintely have to look at wiki to know which value is recommended. Define
precise presets in editors is a good start.

Such problems don't appear with substation=*, pipeline=*, waterway=*...

> if you want to avoid a generic subname :type, I think that should be
> fire_hydrant:couplings_type
> the same with for fire_hydrant:couplings_size

Why not for fire_hydrant:coupling_type
The main goal is to avoid supplementary namespaces

All the best

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170704/8effcb54/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list