[talk-au] NSW Fire Station names

[Warin]

On 13/2/23 13:25, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Echoing what cleary said about reliance on the DCS Base Map, it's not 
> our goal to recreate their label format.


The labels they use look to be based on what is 'on the ground'. I don't 
think they have made the labels up.

The question of DCS being out of date, I know of one fire station that 
appears to be out of date since the fires. That is noted in the OSM data 
base but is still where it was and the same as the DCS. I have an idea 
of where it has gone but lack any proof let alone OSM usable proof.  On 
the other hand I have just marked a 'fire station' in OSM that has not 
been used for ~30 years as was:amenity=fire_station, it does not exist 
in the DCS Base Map. No map is free of 'errors' nor of being entirely 
'up to date'.

>
> In my opinion it's more important to have branch and ref tagged as it 
> gives more flexibility to data consumers on how they choose to label 
> it, eg. they could choose,
>
> {branch} FS
> {branch} Fire Station
> {branch} Fire Station, {ref}
> {operator} Station {ref}, {branch}
>
> etc.
Agree that they could, but few will.
>
> For the name I'd first go with any signage on the ground, but 
> otherwise I think "Lane Cove Fire Station" works well.


I think the 'signage on the ground' is dictated by 'head office' so as 
to present some uniformity to the public. Much like any large 
organization these days.

>
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 at 22:01, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     Note .. The Lane Cove Fire Station had 2 entries for the one feature,
>     one on a single node the other on a way tagged for the building. I
>     removed the duplicated tags from the building and place them on the
>     node. No I am not doing this everywhere, I seek to separate the
>     amenity=fire_station from the building=* and then expand the
>     amenity to
>     the boundaries usually beyond the building. Lane Cove did not lend
>     itself to that. Still thinking on it, and a few other problem sites.
>
>
> For fire stations that have grounds then yes you'd have 
> amenity=fire_station on the grounds with a seperate building=* way 
> inside. But for these city fire stations that don't have grounds and 
> take up the whole building, the amenity=fire_station -should go on the 
> building way.
Noted.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20230213/8a681360/attachment.htm>