Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-23 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
OK, latest draft is up at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dtoilets It involves the discouraged ; operator, though perhaps in an acceptable use case. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://l

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Brian Wolford wrote: > > For what seem to be clear categories: > flush, sealed pit, unsealed pit, removable/"batch" container > Then how does a typical composting toilet get tagged? Flush? Sealed pit? And how do we get the chemical smell aspect into things? seal

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
Composting: What's catching me up is that that system is just _one_ type of composting toilet. There are many types; dry (w/o urine), simple (w/ urine), vermicompost(worms), electric(vent fan and stirrer), and blackwater for example. And they can be presented in different ways, to operate like mode

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread fly
On 20.06.2013 18:46, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Ok, good points. There are at least three major "front end" experiences, > none of which are exclusive at any location: > > 1. Squat > 2. Sit > 3. Urinal > > And one fairly critical front-end refinement related to wiping: > > 1. Toilet paper provid

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread fly
On 20.06.2013 21:39, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Brian Wolford > mailto:worldwidewolf...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I don't see the relevant difference, then, between an onsite compost > toilet and a pit, to the toilet experience.They are both an open > drop wh

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Brian Wolford wrote: > I don't see the relevant difference, then, between an onsite compost > toilet and a pit, to the toilet experience.They are both an open drop where > you can see the waste. > Perhaps the user experience difference is better captured in a out

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
I don't see the relevant difference, then, between an onsite compost toilet and a pit, to the toilet experience.They are both an open drop where you can see the waste. I think it's better to use composting= for designating if its composting and how. Especially since it can or cannot apply to multip

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
To me a bucket is a bucket. What happens *outside the toilet* is of no relevance to the toilet experience. The use of chemicals is, however, relevant. Chemically sensitive people for example may avoid chemical toilets of any style. Does that have to be a tag of its own? toilets

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
This is great. One note on composing. Compost toilets can be both fixed location pits, and buckets. I'm familiar with systems where buckets (5 to 40 gallons) are filled with waste and then dumped on a local compost or picked up by a third party and brought to a human waste composing center. I woul

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
Ok, good points. There are at least three major "front end" experiences, none of which are exclusive at any location: 1. Squat 2. Sit 3. Urinal And one fairly critical front-end refinement related to wiping: 1. Toilet paper provided. 2. BYOP (Bring your own paper if you want it)

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:06 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Well, you also have the old-style outhouse, where you have a small > building, including a seat, located above a pit which receives the waste. > The temporary latrines used at construction sites are much the same, except > that the "pit"

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread John F. Eldredge
Well, you also have the old-style outhouse, where you have a small building, including a seat, located above a pit which receives the waste. The temporary latrines used at construction sites are much the same, except that the "pit" is the bottom portion of the latrine, and the whole thing is ha

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread fly
On 20.06.2013 16:55, Brian Wolford wrote: > > > +1 for flush being water carrying it away, but I thought pit would > refer to a hole in the "ground" (or floor, i.e. a place where you > stand to do your business) as opposed to a seat, but now I > understand you see this as opposed

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
> > +1 for flush being water carrying it away, but I thought pit would refer > to a hole in the "ground" (or floor, i.e. a place where you stand to do > your business) as opposed to a seat, but now I understand you see this as > opposed to being attached to the sewers? > Not necessarily sewers, bu

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2013/6/20 Brian Wolford > you can have pits with flush or without so this modification doesn't work. >> What are the benefits of the changes you propose? >> >> I think it is referring to the "front-end" or "user-experience" of the > toilet. In which case it wouldn't be both flush or pit, flush be

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Brian Wolford
> > you can have pits with flush or without so this modification doesn't work. > What are the benefits of the changes you propose? > > I think it is referring to the "front-end" or "user-experience" of the toilet. In which case it wouldn't be both flush or pit, flush being water carries it away, an

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
On 20/giu/2013, at 07:22, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > I see a an alternative of: > toilets:type=[flush,pit,chemical,bucket] > > Thus we might have: > > amenity=toilets > toilets:type=pit > drinking_water=yes > fee=no you can have pits with flush or without so this modification doesn't work. Wh

Re: [Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-20 Thread John Sturdy
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Looking at the old proposal page for > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pitlatrine > > I see a an alternative of: > toilets:type=[flush,pit,chemical,bucket] > > Thus we might have: > > *amenity=toilets* > *toilets:type=pit* > *drinking

[Tagging] Reviving "pitlatrine" proposal from 2011

2013-06-19 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
Looking at the old proposal page for http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pitlatrine I see a an alternative of: toilets:type=[flush,pit,chemical,bucket] Thus we might have: *amenity=toilets* *toilets:type=pit* *drinking_water=yes* *fee=no* Any comments before I write up a proposal page along