Talk:Proposed features/Fire Hydrant

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wow would take a lot of time/effort to map them! In the UK they are just tiny(size of a hand) manhole covers in the pavement. - LastGrape

I've already started using this en-masse --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 03:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Do not use Fire Hydrant for water wells used for fire fighting. See proposed feature Well_Water. Vanagaudi 20:23 04. November 2007 (UTC)

While you're mapping fire hydrants you should try to collect the nominal diameter and reference number. Both can be found on the signs that are close to the fire hydrant. (at least in Germany) Dekarl 14:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Very useful to know is connection type / diameter. There are several connection types, usually standardized per country though some places operates with several standards. Most hydrant should be supplied with the necessary information. As a mariner in international trade, I've seen different standards becoming a problem. --Skippern 15:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

We also got fire hydrants in Greece. It's ok for me for it to be mapped as amenity=fire_hydrant . I'm of course open to discussion and I will change my mind accordingly Logictheo 09:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that we should think about water the same way that we think about power. Water is very important I have listed the idea Talk:Proposed_features/water_well

man_made=fire_hydrant is more suitable than amenity=fire_hydrant. --Skippern 01:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, that is a better association that you propose. --Ceyockey 02:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I suggest fire_hydrant:position=sidewalk, not sidewalks. AM909 09:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't footway be more inline with existing tagging? --JohnSmith 10:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Abandoned draft?

See Rejected_features#Abandoned_Drafts where this proposal is listed. I take it that inclusion in this table is incorrect. --Ceyockey 12:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


To me it is clear that OSM is great but should not be used for life-critical applications. If fire hydrants get listed widely, one might be tempted to think that something life-critical as fire fighting could rely safely on it ... --hagman 20:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Their presence and pipe diameter can help in mapping underground pipelines, but the information can also be of interest to various parties from home owners' associations to statisticians and even routers (a plausible future scenario: "suggest legal roadside parking places close to original destination" in countries where they affect parking rules). Fire fighters surely have education and protocols on what up-to-date sources to use. Alv 00:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Hagman, what about the reverse point of view, that someone looking for a fire-hydrant in an emergency situation might find it thanks to OSM ? Just try to assess the relative weights of pros and cons. To me it is clear that pros outweight cons.
And if people think a feature is important, they will work on improving the reliability of its mapping. --Jgc 10:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
No risk involved but a common format to represent facts. I can imagine rescue workers using the osm toolchain to feed their Garmins with their very own dataset.
Or for crisis mapping, "which hydrant is still usable as a fresh water source after a quake?"
On the other hand you want to know where they are if your are planning a big party / construction site and need a water supply. As you will get your water out of the same hydrants, at least in germany. --dekarl 09:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


Actually this object does not offer fire but water.

I propose to name it "hydrant" and place it in the water namespace. Lulu-Ann

It is an emergency thing as well, why not tag it as emergency=*? --JohnSmith 08:22, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
+1 for emergency=*, but beware the current use of this key: Key:emergency --SteveVG 14:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm aware, but I don't see a problem using it in this manner, currently only access restrictions and hospitals that have ERs, which fits nicely with emergency=* overall... --JohnSmith 14:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
A hydrant is not only for emergency. It is a part of the water distribution system. Lulu-Ann
I'm sure most emergency things get used for alternative purposes, but if there is a fire I'd want one close to my place... --JohnSmith 14:36, 2 August 2010 (BST)
If I'm hungry, I want an apple tree next to my place. Let's start tagging them as emergency! --Scai 19:04, 2 August 2010 (BST)
You aren't going to die of hunger in a matter of hours, or minutes as the case may be --JohnSmith 20:04, 2 August 2010 (BST)
While I do think that fire_hydrant might be better suited under emergency=, legacy is one hell of a reason not to change. It is not just changing a wiki and running a bot to replace (or better: append the tags), it is also reeducating the hundreds of thousands of contributors for years to come that this has changed. [tagstat] gives 3,894 matches for amenity=fire_hydrant, 31 for man_made=fire_hydrant, and less than 5 for any other option... It is as problematic as a licence change to ODbL: sure, it might fix the few minor problems, but it brings enormous pains in process too. So IMHO it is not worth it, especially as it is an isolated event and not an attempt to fix whole concept of the freeform tags (which might or might not be a good idea, too hard to say) --mnalis 00:33, 8 August 2010 (BST)
There isn't that much of a legacy here, only JOSM presets... as for future users adapting, most use presets, fix the preset you don't have any legacy users either.... -- JohnSmith 00:40, 8 August 2010 (BST)
But JOSM isn't only editor out there, and even when I use it I rarely use presets (it is harder for me to find a preset [even when it is present, when it often isn't] then to just type the tag in; and I know I'm far from the only person doing it. And almost four thousand nodes looks like quite a legacy for me. Even if it were the case that majority of users uses JOSM and uses presets and updates their software regularly (and I do not think that is such a guaranteed thing, to say the least) there still would be pretty big amount of people who would need to be contacted and explained and explained again (sometimes not in english), and bugged their software maker to make updates to presets if needed, and explain calmly against their frustration why it had to be done etc. Only then (if you could ever contact most of them, which is doubtful as quite a few don't read OSM contacts) would the situation become "clean". We're talking many months of time and effort here. And still after all that trouble, most of the amenity= namespace would still be the same mess as now. And some (hopefully small) percentage of people would be somewhat more pissed off at making them go through all the trouble. So the question reiterates itself: is it worth it?
JOSM is the only software, editor or otherwise to even use a fire hydrant tag, the point is it isn't widely adopted by software. -- JohnSmith 01:54, 8 August 2010 (BST)
As people know this tag and use it; and changing that requires changing their habits, and that is usually not something people like. And still, as Lulu-Ann correctly notes, it would not always fit perfectly in emergency=. As it doesn't fit perfectly it amenity=, also. Now, if it were a new tag never before used, I'd go with emergency= if that is what majority wanted (although, water=hydrant might be better as Lulu-Ann suggests), and if it was a part of the plan of redesigning the OSM not to be free-form tag and to only accepts approved and documented values, I would also support it. But as it is neither, I see changing it (to any value) as probably bringing more pain than good. --mnalis 01:11, 8 August 2010 (BST)
If there was a house burning down, would this be used to clean a street or put out a fire? -- JohnSmith 01:54, 8 August 2010 (BST)
Actually hydrants are more often used to check the water quality than to put out fires. I am happy this is the way it is. Lulu-Ann


Why not use pascal for pressure?

Always use SI units! Lulu-Ann


Why not use the attribute flow (debit) for Fire Hydrant ?

For firemen, the pressure isn't very important because it's do by the pump of truck. The flow (debit) is more important. In France for example a normalized Fire Hydrant need to pourchase 120 m^3 in 2 hours.