On 13/11/22 03:00, Davidoskky via Tagging wrote:
Is this proposal functionally any different from the water outlet
proposal?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_outlet
There is a lot more to be done for something like this. It needs to
incorporate all "man made sources of water' eg wells.
I am coming around to liking the value 'water_supply_outlet'. I have
thought of 'water_source' but that could be misconstrued as the start of
a river.
Decorative fountains do not fall under 'water_supply_outlet'. Another
problem with 'water_supply_outlet' is the chosen symbol of a tap, I'd
leave the symbol to later -see how it evolves.
I'm alright with using a name different from fountain since a lot of
people disagree on that name.
By doing all this you're effectively deprecating amenity=fountain;
that's strange to me.
It would remove decorative fountains from amenity=fountain as this looks
to be evolving into a mess of things that I would not call 'fountains'.
It would leave amenity=fountain existing.
I would not tag decorative fountains as tourism as those are not
necessarily there for tourism; you have fountains in hidden places
that have never seen a tourist...
? If hidden how do we know they are there .. :) There are a few
'hidden' tourist spots, sometimes I map them, sometimes I leave them off
the map in particular where the venue is small and I don't want to see a
crowd of people.
Moreover, this would require retagging a lot of objects, and it cannot
even be done mechanically because you'd end up mistagging the
fountains which are not decorative.
Agreed it is a lot of work. But there is no other way of isolating
decorative fountains from the other 'fountains' no mater what tag is
agreed too.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
