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=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.
The tags values are intentionally a bit blurry as it should be clear that these are not 100% reliable descriptions.
"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.
- (...But perhaps it's can be safely placed in the "name" field.) --Valeriobozz (talk) 22:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Too much !
- 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)