I’m extensively mapping street lights these days, addicted to seeing it glow at OSMstreetLight.
Towards a schema that works for me, I already took attributes from light_source, especially light:shape and light:tilt. Now I’m wondering:
? Could I switch to light_source completely?
Pros:
more general concept in light_source, extensible far beyond hw=street_lamp, i. e.
** floodlight (think: no misuse of street_lamp for stadium flood lights and the like)
** warning (think: flash lights on some crossing)
** lamp_type → light:method °°
moves street lights out of crowded ‘highway’ name space, what looks good to me for topic clarity
Cons:
no more straight association by purpose like in ‘street_lamp’
man_mad=mast has ‘construction’ but misses a forms attribute equivalent to lamp_mount=(angled|bend|high|straight)_mast - but could be added
‘street_lamp’ popularity, > 4 Mio uses, but does it matter?
Sure I’d like to spread the word on light_source proposal to get it into more common use. There shall be (more) light!
°° knowing infamous spread of value ‘LED’ instead of ‘led’, see lamp_type LED vs. led
I would not favour that. Street_lamp is a very well established and heavily used tag and one of the most common public light sources so I’d say there is nothing wrong in having a dedicated tag for it.
For more detailed information I think it is fine to add the light_source attributes to the street_lamp tag.
This is true but it would not do any harm to add such details whereas I do not see any benefit in replacing the tag highway=street_lamp by light_source=*.