On 2/27/14 4:37 AM, Georg Feddern wrote: > Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty: > >> then the issue is whether we want to modify fire_hydrant:type or >> replace it with a different tag altogether, say fire_hydrant:delivery >> if we keep type, should we replace pillar with plug or fire_plug or just >> let that go. > > I would keep hydrant:type - because it is a physical type/design in my > opinion. > With hydrant:delivery I would not assume the physical type, sorry. > > And I would keep type=pillar. > With fire_plug I - and I suppose many others - would assume "something > you can connect with or to". > And that are all hydrants in any design, it is too generic in my opinion. > fire plug in US usage is pretty specific, whereas pillar is a complete mystery in the US. since there is no UK usage as the type is not in service there, it kind of leaves things open, as normally OSM uses UK english as the baseline and it doesn't help in this case.
> Regarding standpipe: > I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to > underground hydrants. > So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, > may be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser. > in US usage, standpipe is common usage for systems in buildings, we have almost no underground hydrants, so that usage is unknown here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/nfgusedautoparts/12813740234/ i am discussing terminology with a retired UK firefighter, i will find out from him what standard UK usage is for standpipe/riser systems in buildings richard -- [email protected] Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
