Talk:Tag:amenity=drinking water

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I would like to propose a set of values for drinking_water to indicate approximate quality of the source of water.

drinking_water=stream could indicate water that comes from a body of water like a river or stream, which could be potentially contaminated (i.e. use with caution).

drinking_water=deep_well could indicate water that comes from a fairly deeply drilled well with a closed pump on top (what is called a "forage" in French). These wells are typically harder to contaminate.

drinking_water=treated could indicate water that has been treated by a reputable source (the water company, etc.).

-- Glasserc 07:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Subjective criteria for the quality of the water

I agree to the proposal from Glasserc above - it is very important to have a notion about the quality of the drinking water. When you are at the source it is often possible to estimate the quality - these estimates should also be taggable in the map to help planning e.g. during trecking tours. Tags for official measurements could be added as well but I'm not familiar with these things, so I will not do it.

Thus below a suggestion for the tags that can be estimated by everyone:

drinking_water:quality=official_drinking_water: If the water is checked and approved by the officials - e.g. because it is tap water.

drinking_water:quality=pure_source: If there are objective reasons that allow you to conclude that the water is pure, even though it is not checked. E.g. in alpine territory the source can be above any civilization. There should be no reason to doubt about the quality.

drinking_water:quality=commonly_used: One can assume that the water is pure because many people drink it every day (including the mapper) and do not get ill.

drinking_water:quality=likely_ok: The water looks OK and clean but otherwise there is no indication that it is good.

drinking_water:quality=questionable: The water does not really seem suited for drinking.

The tags values are intentionally a bit blurry as it should be clear that these are not 100% reliable descriptions.

See also this discussion on the german mailing list.

--Grungelborz (talk) 19:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

"Theme" (?) Type

In some cities there are a lot of `drinking_water` that share a certain historical and cultural context, and so they so differs from many others most common. For example in Turin (Italy) there is the "Toret" `drinking_water` (Toret (Turin, Italy)) and it's so common and so different from many others.

I think can be useful to categorize these "cultural themes" of fountains, somehow. Suggestions? --Valeriobozz (talk) 22:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

(...But perhaps it's can be safely placed in the "name" field.) --Valeriobozz (talk) 22:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Have a look to WikiProject France/Fontaines Wallace --FrViPofm (talk) 22:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
OK so I will use only "artwork_type" :) Thank you --Valeriobozz (talk) 08:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Too much tags !

Too much !

  1. amenity=drinking_water
  2. amenity=water_point
  3. amenity=watering_place
  4. natural=spring
  5. amenity=fountain
  6. man_made=water_well
KISS  ! We already have enough tags !
amenity=water_point (or better amenity=water_supply) + amount=* + drinking_water=* + man_made=fountain/water_well/trough/wash_house + access=* would fit !
and it is to the renderer to chose the aspect(s) being rendered (drinkable for hiking maps, construction, tourism, nature...).
Or we will soon have more values amenity=plant_watering_place, amenity=chicken_watering_place
--FrViPofm (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
These tags are for things that are completely different concepts in natural language, though. Why would we use the same tag for all of them? It wouldn't reduce complexity, as we would still need to distinguish between springs, decorative fountains, water sources for animals and so on. It would only move the distinctions from the top-level tag into the subtags, requiring more tags per object. --Tordanik 12:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


The suggested rendering is of a tap ... not a bubbler/water fountain. Surely this is deceptive and should be changed to something that actually suggests what is being mapped? Warin61 (talk) 06:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


Is cold and warm water really inportant? I could find a lot of useful usage and real-life application. Most drinking water is room temperature and that varies from location to location. If it is not important, please remove mentioning these tags in the wiki.

--Pander (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't recall adding that! Anyway ... I would use temperature=ambient for most situations (where the water is at or near the local air temperature). The only situation where it could be usefull is where the temperature drops below freezing for long periods of time. See Warin61 It maybe useful to have that link as a 'see also'? (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Arr! This may have been added for office/inside a building use. To make tea/coffee or provide cooled drinking water. So that may well have little present use. I'd obviously prefer the use of 'my' temperature scheme though. Warin61 (talk) 23:18, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I added these tags about temperature after discuss with I don't remember nor 'to who' neither 'where' anymore. I believe that is important because it is common where I live to find in public areas device where you can drink/take cold, natural, or hot water (hot to drink Chimarrão mainly inside universities' campi. What would be the orientation when the same device has both cold and hot water? temperature=hot;cold ? Santamariense (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Best to put discussions where you (and others) can find them. So .. this hot/cold .. is it from one spout (pipe outlet) .. then temperature=adjustable, temperature:minimum=cold, temperature:maximum=hot. If it is from two spouts then map each spout as separate OSM entities (each has a separate OSM node). I would think this is more normal from a tap outlet rather than a drinking fountain .. see Warin61 (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
When I documented these tags, I thought them like temporary tags, or permanent if no another arised up. This wiki have to be modified to the draft temperature scheme, and If the community is according to, disable what was yet mapped as cold_water and hot_water. Santamariense (talk) 02:32, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
So there is (IMHO in general sense) iced (actively made very cold), cooled (actively made cold), cold (e.g. from melting glacier or deep well), ambient (room/air temperature, e.g. cities from taps or from non-deep or shallow wells and ponds), warm (from a hot spring, for showering or hot tubs), warmed (actively warmed, for showering or doing dishes), boiling (actively heated for cooking, tea, coffee and instant soup) Pander (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes to the above, the common use terms such as 'hot', 'cold' etc would be the terms that I would use in OSM tagging as these require less thought by the mapper. However, bubblers/drinking fountains to my knowledge only provide water at either ambient or cold/chilled temperatures, the water is intended for direct human consumption without further additions (tea/coffee/cordial etc). So I suspect this is for a tap outlet and should use man_made=water_tap Warin61 (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)