On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 5:40 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > it is exactly the same thing . I would also include those in private > buildings, there’s no difference. > I can see how one would think they are the same. To a first respondent, they have few important differences that may not be visible to non-experts. One, they are maintained by the cities to resist major events. Two, they are accessible to the public, outside of (collapsed?) buildings. Three, the alarms in buildings are expected to be accessible *first* by the people in the building: first respondents are unlikely to reach the alarms in a condo or a bank before the people in there do (or the automatic signal goes off). You can add alarms in private buildings but I don't see how that information would be valuable. In san francisco, private condos, public buildings and larger buildings are mandated to have fire alarms connected to the fire department anyway so you'd basically map redundant information. Not sure about other places in the world, I don't object to using the tag outside of its scope. and to answer Warin's comment : you don't need a map to find them > Think of fire hydrants: they are usually on public land and we map them.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
