On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 14:22, Dave F via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > As emergency=ambulance_station appears to be a later invention, was > there a valid reason fire_station did follow suit? > Presumably because the icon looks like a firepit. Or maybe an eternal flame. Or maybe a flammable chemical site. So everyone goes there to sit around the firepit. Or admire the eternal flame. Or wait to see the chemical site explode. So it's an amenity. Joking aside, the carto people appear to have a fixed rule of "no synonyms." A very good rule in many situations as we don't want more than one way of mapping the exact same thing. However, it seems problematic in cases like this where there is broad agreement that we should replace amenity=fire_station with emergency=fire_station and that the 1:1 correspondence means it could even be considered for an automated edit. It would seem that TEMPORARILY allowing a synonym in this case would be a sensible thing to do. Render both until editors have made the change and most occurrences in the db have been updated, then only render emergency=fire_station. There are other cases where a policy of temporarily allowing synonyms in order to rationalizing tagging would be useful: landuse=grass vs landcover=grass comes to mind. As things stand, though, emergency=fire_station doesn't render and (without a change in policy by carto) will never render, so mappers won't use it, so you'll just have to live with the confusion. And the further confusion from the icon being completely misleading. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
