Talk:Proposed features/Key:light source

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

These tags would be really helpful to use for ways, or way relations, not only for individual nodes/lamps. So the text at [Proposed_features/Key:light_source#Description]] would read "device, or series of devices", where it currently says "device", or something similar. Abbafei (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

So you mean something like natural=tree_row? Sounds reasonable. MHohmann (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


How about a tag of light:mount=* with common values of pole, ground, wall? --Jaggedmind (talk) 14:38, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

There exists a key support=* for exactly this purpose, which is used already for other objects, such as amenity=clock. I suggest using this for lamps as well, for the sake of uniformity. MHohmann (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Some comments

light:power=* and light:flux=* only make sense as a total value for the identified map object, and not per lantern or per light bulb.

I suggest support=wire should be support=catenary, which is the correct term where the support wire is stretched between two or more attachment points. You might consider also having support=pendant where the support wire has just a single attachment point vertically above the lantern (if you think there are enough use cases to justify).

light:count=* - need to be clearer if this is a count of light_source=* (such as lanterns, floodlights) or a count of light bulbs, flames, mantles, etc. I don't think it makes sense to count light bulbs, flames, mantles in a single lantern, and light:count=* should be a count of light_source=* (lanterns, floodlights, etc). Hence light:flames=* should be dropped as it doesn't make sense separately from light:count=*.

Zcapw15 (talk) 16:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Primary tag values

No idea of what these are meant to describe at present. I would suggest that it simply describe the lights projected pattern - taking over the role of light:shape ... the values then become much clearer e.g. floodlight, spotlight, spherical (a point source), cylindrical (omnidirectional). The term 'lantern' is not a good chice for a description - has multiple interpretations. Warin61 (talk) 22:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

It seems to simply be a categorization of light source types, mostly based on purpose. I think that kind of classification is helpful, as it's usually tricky to describe all the details of a lighting setup with subtags. But we know what a floodlight in a stadium typically looks like, for example.--Tordanik 16:42, 6 October 2017 (UTC)


light:method=LED - Light emitting diode.

It should be led (or then you should write LASER too).

Lower case is easier to type and leds are now an usual term. Like laser it's an abbreviation.

Not a big deal (for German-speakers: das ist mir Käse, yes case :-D)) but for coherence it should be the same casing.

--Nospam2005 (talk) 20:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


Maybe it is time to go through RfC or maybe also voting? Or is it intended to be kept in permanent "Proposed" stage? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 05:09, 10 April 2018 (UTC)