Hi,
according to this discussion I cancel the former proposal drinkable
and start a new proposal drinking_water.
We can transfer drinkable= to drinking_water=. The future tagging-
scheme will have only one tag to indicate the existence and quality of
drinking water.
In the future the tag
I'm thinking about transfering my proposal drinkable to a new
proposal drinking_water. The proposed values can be the same.
This means migration of drinkable=yes/no to drinking_water=yes/no.
The new tagging-scheme use one tag for standalone features that can
provide drinking water and to
Le 28/02/2014 01:23, Dave Swarthout a écrit :
@FrViPofm: I respectfully disagree. The drinking_water tag you refer
to is intended to indicate if drinking water is available at a certain
facility, not whether it is safe to drink. The values in your example
demonstrate this intention with yes
I was using the surface tag with water as an example of something you would
not do. Surface is a tag for highways that tells if the highway surface is
paved, unpaved, concrete, asphalt, whatever. You would never use the tags
natural=water and surface=concrete together to tag a single object. They
Don't forget the opposite!
One occasionally sees a water tap of some sort, which is explicitly
*not*potable
*not* drinkable.
The International Plumbing Code (IPC) section 608.8 covers marking of
non-potable sources.
Curiously the requirement is in English. Have a read:
Am 27.02.2014 15:28:13 schrieb(en) Vincent Pottier:
What about drinking_water used also more than 3000 times ?
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinkable (~3300)
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinking_water (~3100)
It seems that today drinkable=* is on standalone watering
I don't like drinkable=official. I'd like drinkable=yes +
drinkable:source=official.
Janko
2014-03-02 18:35 GMT+01:00 Rudolf Martin rudolf.mar...@gmx.de:
That's an interesting idea. No objection from me.
I see a little problem in the legal relevance.
IMHO drinkable=yes has no legal
There are several smartphone apps that build in drinking water capability:
I helped develop one of them.
drinking_water=yes on a facility means that drinking water is available at
that location, and implies potable. It's
meant for the common cases such as where a toilet has a standard drinking
I think the term drinkable might be more attractive because it is so
closely related to the term drinking_water — it's a logical extension of
the top level amenity tag:
amenity=drinking_water (drinkability=yes assumed)
to different water sources such as fountains, springs and water wells.
Ah, the wheel has turned full circle. We had this same discussion a
couple of years ago.
IMHO potable is the right answer, but amazingly, although everyone
who joined the discussion knew what it meant, they all thought it
shouldn't be used in case someone didn't know.
Best wishes,
Andrew
On
Le 27/02/2014 07:18, Rudolf Martin a écrit :
Hallo,
the tag drinkable= is used more than 3000 times.
Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag.
I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some
discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm
On 2014-02-27 08:32, Dave Swarthout wrote :
No objection. I equate the term drinkable with potable. The latter
is a weird sounding term, to me at least, but is the one in common use
in the United States to designate water sources that are safe to drink
from.
potable comes from Latin potare (to
Am 27/feb/2014 um 11:00 schrieb Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com:
I think the term drinkable might be more attractive because it is so
closely related to the term drinking_water — it's a logical extension of
the top level amenity tag:
amenity=drinking_water (drinkability=yes
Le 27/02/2014 07:18, Rudolf Martin a écrit :
Hallo,
the tag drinkable= is used more than 3000 times.
Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag.
I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some
discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm
@FrViPofm: I respectfully disagree. The drinking_water tag you refer to is
intended to indicate if drinking water is available at a certain facility,
not whether it is safe to drink. The values in your example demonstrate
this intention with yes and no comprising over 90% of the values in
Hallo,
the tag drinkable= is used more than 3000 times.
Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag.
I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some
discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm forum.
No objection. I equate the term drinkable with potable. The latter is a
weird sounding term, to me at least, but is the one in common use in the
United States to designate water sources that are safe to drink from.
Some water sources are either polluted or dirty and are to be avoided.
OTOH, I can
potable seems a less ambiguous term.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinking_water has tagging momentum.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
18 matches
Mail list logo
