[Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

[marc marc]

Le 01. 09. 17 à 00:54, Viking a écrit :
> In this sense flow_rate is more appropriate.
ok

> I think we should find a solution also for 10% of hydrants that don't have a type/pressure/water_source, or we will never have a definitive solution.
> Considering that in some countries pressurized hydrants are not distuinguishable from not pressurized ones, I'm starting to think that the only way is to revert to the previous approach and define:
> - hydrant: a device with couplings used to take water, pressurized or not. pressure=* will distinguish among them. water_source=* can complete the information.
> - suction point: a place to park the fire engine and put down your hoses and pump.
> I would prefer to have only pressurized hydrants in emergency=fire_hydrant, but there are too many cases that can't be easily handled.
> Anyway fire_hydrant:type=pond should be deprecated in favour of water_source=pond.
It look like fine for me.
what do others think? if somebody find it is not appropriate,
I think that it would be desirable to split out the "meaning change"
to validate the rest of the proposal.

Le 01. 09. 17 à 23:08, Viking a écrit :
 > If we want to remove fire_hydrant: namespace, what's about transform
 > fire_hydrant:diameter=# in diameter=# ? It is already documented
 > its use with hydrants: [0]
yes the prefix in "fire_hydrant:diameter" is bad
it is not the diameter of fire_hydrant.
the wiki said it is the diameter of the underground pipe.
and is this tag well used? I am not able to judge whether values
are realistic
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant%3Adiameter
It look like however that a lot of value concerns the diameter
of the coupling
water_source:diameter <> coupling:diameter could make
confusion impossible

 > fire_hydrant:count=# ?
same question, do we often have several hydrants in the same place
that are mapped with only one node? or people are mistaken
and indicates the number of coupling? I have never yet met the case.
maybe we need to ask mapper that use it.

 > I would keep these tags as they are now.
I think it is useful to stop the list of changes otherwise
it is a work without an end.