> In general it might make sense to have the complete list on the key page of
> emergency, and a
> selection on map features.

I've made this change. In generally, now that we have taglists for
most parts of Map Features, it would be good to have a longer list at
each Key: page (e.g Key:emergency, Key:route, Key:amenity) and a more
consise list in the Map Features templates.

>> 2) =fire_water_pond " A man made or natural pond with water for a fire
>> department." 2785 uses
>> - Remove: This tag isn't verifiable, or else it could be added to any
>> pond or small lake. It's not much used outside of Germany.
> Why is that not verifiable? Such ponds typically have a red-framed sign
> "Löschwasserteich".
> Ground-verifiable, not necessarily Bing-verifiable.

I see how that's verifiable in Germany, but isn't it actually an
emergency=suction_point in that case? The sign is the place where you
suction water into the fire engine, right?

In other countries we are not so picky about what water sources we use
for fighting fires. ;-)

>> 3) =access_point "A sign number which can be used to define your
>> current position in case of an emergency" - 5555 uses
>> - Remove: the similar tag 'highway=access_point" is much more common
>> and was approved.
> This is a good approach to improve tagging of emergency features by
> aggregating them under the
> emergency key, in particular those that are not highway features.

That may be, but would required an approved proposal to deprecated the
more common tag.

> there should be a template
> separate from the Map features template that can be included in each of
> them. Do you know how to
> handle translation of the subheadings in such case?

Since the page is just several taglists, I'm not sure if it's still
necessary to have a separate template. Probably it's easier to just
copy and past the taglists, then add the language and translate the

I will try this out for the Indonesian page and see if it works easily.

- Joseph Eisenberg

Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to