|The Feature Page for this approved proposal is located at Tag:amenity=fountain.|
|Definition:||A fountain for cultural / decorational / recreational purposes|
A fountain for cultural / decorational / recreational purposes.
This might range from the usual fountain that you'll find in lot's of city centers, up to large fountains like the "Fontana di Trevi" in rome that can act as a landmark and is also a tourism=attraction. The water of those fountains is often not suitable for drinking.
Applies to nodes and areas:
<tag k="amenity" v="fountain"/> <tag k="name" v="Fontana di Trevi"/> <tag k="drinkable" v="yes|no|mineral|..."/> (water is drinkable or otherwise special, default: no)
Area: light blue
Idea: An icon with some water "flowing up in the sky".
- See "Springbrunnen" on boehmwanderkarten.de as an example SlowRider 20:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Note: The osmarender uses a filled blue dot as a generic POI for a lot of tags/values. So the first icon would be more appropriate for any render based on osmarender.
- drinking water get "drinking water" in smaller amounts for personal usage (hiking, spa, ...)
- water point get larger amounts of "drinking water" e.g. for caravans
- spring water flowing out of the ground. May have a fontain build around (see Roman Bath in Bath, U.K)
- Water well is a man made excavation in the ground to gain water from an aquifer
As I'm not a native speaker, is this the right term for all of the "springs" mentioned above? Is this possibly also the right thing for "drinkable water dispensers" (sorry, don't know the right term)? Ulfl 20:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I support this proposal as I could need it for mapping. Most villages and cities contain such fountains SlowRider 20:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you want to distinguish between general fountains (which are there for cultural reasons) and drinking fountains (which are a useful amenity? amenity=drinking_fountain? Gravitystorm 20:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I support this proposal as a need for it came up today. Ulf, yes this sounds dead right. Myfanwy 20:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- do not support this proposal as it is. I have been using 'amenity=fountain' for drinking fountains, but think that these should not be confused with spas, so I would like to see at least two separate terms. I'm also unsure about putting these with 'man-made'. 21:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- It should be amenity=fountain to be consistent with previous usage of man_made. Man_made typically refers to industry like power plants and things like that.
- man_made is a terribly named key, as most things are man_made. Do not support. Bruce89 23:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I, too, prefer amenity; no extra feature for drinkable water, instead an additional key "drinkable=yes|no" (optional) Florianschmitt 07:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I support this proposal either as 'amenity' or as 'man_made'. I think it is not a duplicate of water point because a fountain is not only a 'place to get fresh water e.g. for caravans'. And a fountain is not restricted to drinking/potable water, therefore I support the additional key drinkable=yes|no. To include spas, i.e., fountains with mineral water in my region I suggest to extend this additional key to drinkable=yes|no|mineral. --BerndR 14:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I support this in general, but I think it is two separate things. A drinking_fountain is an amenity that provides a drink of either plain water or some sort of mineral water. An ornamental_fountain is a tourist feature for decoration. They are different though sometimes they both occur together. I think man_made is not a helpful tag in general. chillly 12:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- I generally support this. Near me someone tagged 'note=there is something in the middle of this pond', it's a fountain and has a name that is even used locally for navigation.
Proposal updated: now only "decorational" fountains (no drinking water), man_made -> amenity, added a "See Also" section -- Ulfl 03:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Looks pretty good, much clearer now, i support this. Myfanwy 04:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I also support the amended proposal. Will make a good addition to tourist maps MikeCollinson 08:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I support, but the old (=before the generalisation of tap water) fountains were all functional (i.e. to provide drink water). Most of the new fountain ore purely ornemental or prestige (in town). So the key drinkable=yes|no is needed. You can actualy drink water from this fountain Kindlifresserbrunnen.--Gummibaerli 09:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- The division between this and amenity=drinking_water is still not good, and many fountains fall through the gap. Many villages and old towns have old fountains which were once the main water supply. They may be decorative or not, but are often still used for practical purposes: eg. a bucket of water to clean a car, though people nowadays may feel it is unsafe to drink from them (in an area I am mapping one of these was cross-contaminated from the sewage system; in another area close by they have high levels of chemicals). These historic, practical fountains would need yet another key to identify them. Marinheiro 09:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I support this proposal. But the differenciation between drinkable and not, should be worked out clearly. Toralf 09:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Proposal updated: I've added drinkable=yes|no|mineral|... -- Ulfl 00:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- All right for me(support) Gummibaerli 17:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- yes, i'll support this as updated Myfanwy 07:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Proposal: Would it be possible to add another key to this tag? I would propose a field to indicate if there's official recognition of potable water, like a signal or indication of water analysis. AntMadeira (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Ulfl 07:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Franc 07:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- MikeCollinson 10:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Lefty1963 10:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- SlowRider 10:39, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- LastGrape 11:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Chillly 11:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Walley 13:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Colin Marquardt 15:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Geoff 16:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Myfanwy 09:36, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal -- Robx 20:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal --Eimai 18:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Wiki tip: use ~~~~ to sign your name.
Voting closed, proposal approved -- Ulfl 01:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)