Hi Stuart
That name topic is a bit tricky for fountains in my opinion. Let's approach this from another side: We are a geographic database, that means we don't need to name objects with their location (like St Restitut Church Bench for a bench that is beside that church, to make an extreme example) because that information is available from the coordinate, by looking at landmark objects close by.
But sometimes names really are descriptive. And they are still accepted in the name tag. For example railway stations. They just get the name of the town usually, but we still add a name tag. That one is easy, because there are nice big signs there with the name on it, and oddities are easy to catch for a mapper, for example if a station serves two towns and gets a double name. So no one questions that railway stations get name tags. But fountains? If there is some inscription with the name on it, go ahead, it has a name. But what if there is no plate or inscription?
For a fountain, if the name is its location, I would only fill the name tag if I was confident that it is its proper name. That people would still call it by that name if it was relocated.
I hope that helps a bit to understand the name tag in OSM
best regards Michael
On 21/12/2019 22:02, European Water Project wrote:
Dear Markus,
I am not sure what a "real" name means when it comes to a water fountain
- unless it happens to be artistic. Most fountain names I have seen
(other than artistic ones) seem to have names linked to a nearby square, street or other landmark. The example above of "St Restitut Church fountain" was for a fountain located on the side of the lone Church in St. Restitut, France.
It seems to me that giving a concise descriptive name in the local language linked to a specific landmark follows the verifiability principal if other mappers (especially those on the ground and local) would always say the name given is fair and true. This being said, I will of course refrain from taking this liberty unless it is sanctioned as acceptable.
Best regards,
Stuart
On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 at 21:11, Markus <selfishseahorse@gmail.com mailto:selfishseahorse@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is giving a descriptive name really not best practice in some circumstances? For example if I invent a name for a fountain "St Restitut Church fountain", is this incorrect ? Adding descriptive names would violate OSM's core principle of verifiability [1] [2] and would make it impossible to distinguish from real names. [1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability [2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name Best regards Markus On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 at 20:09, European Water Project <europeanwaterproject@gmail.com <mailto:europeanwaterproject@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Dear Markus, > > I agree it is clearer and will make that amendment and make sure it is the same in the French version which we will publish in the next days. No one should feel the need to be inventive. > > Is giving a descriptive name really not best practice in some circumstances? For example if I invent a name for a fountain "St Restitut Church fountain", is this incorrect ? > > Best regards, > > Stuart > > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019, 13:18 Markus, <selfishseahorse@gmail.com <mailto:selfishseahorse@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Stuart! >> >> Thanks for adding amenity=fountain to the documentation. I would also change >> >> name = "the name you choose" >> >> to >> >> name = "name of the fountain" (if any) >> >> or similar, because "the name you choose" may lead people to add a >> description (e.g. "Drinking fountain" or "Old fountain on the main >> square in Watertown") instead of the fountain name, if it has one. >> (For descriptions, the key description is used. If the fountain has no >> name, noname=yes can be added.) >> >> Best regards >> >> Markus >> >> >> On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 18:07, European Water Project >> <europeanwaterproject@gmail.com <mailto:europeanwaterproject@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Markus and Simon, >> > >> > We have had many non-technical people read the instructions and have reworked them significantly to make them more legible to individuals who have no knowledge of OSM or Wikimedia Commons. I am sure we will have to continue to improve them further. >> > >> > If either of you have the energy to review them again, I would greatly appreciate it. >> > >> > Best regards, >> > >> > Stuart >> > >> > On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 22:31, European Water Project <europeanwaterproject@gmail.com <mailto:europeanwaterproject@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello Markus, >> >> >> >> Based on your suggestion, we will suggest when adding a drinking fountains to for them to be tagged either 1) as amenity = drinking_water or 2 ) with two tags a) amenity = fountain and b) drinking_water = yes. >> >> >> >> And for section 3) we will suggest that for editing a water fountain that does not seem to have drinking quality water that the fountain should be designated with two tags a) amenity = fountain and b) drinking_water = no. >> >> >> >> Thank you for your comments, >> >> >> >> Stuart >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 15 Dec 2019, 22:05 Markus, <selfishseahorse@gmail.com <mailto:selfishseahorse@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Stuart! >> >>> >> >>> On the Wikimedia page you suggest adding drinking_water=yes to a >> >>> drinking fountain (amenity=drinking_water). However, this is redundant >> >>> as amenity=drinking_water already implies drinking_water=yes. [1] >> >>> >> >>> [1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddrinking_water >> >>> >> >>> By the way, you may also be interested in mapping amenity=fountain, >> >>> i.e. decorative fountains, [2] as they often provide drinkable water >> >>> too. Note that for amenity=fountain it makes sense to add >> >>> drinking_water=yes/no. >> >>> >> >>> [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dfountain >> >>> >> >>> Regards >> >>> >> >>> Markus