Named EV Chargers

Thoughts on ‘named’ EV chargers? Around 50% of chargers in Oz have some ‘name’.

Most look to be adding the either the location or name of the operator etc (ie Freds Shop, XYZ carpark, Tesla supercharger etc), I suspect so it gets rendered on the map.

Are folks happy if I remove the names. I will ensure that no details are lost by making sure any operator or network details gets added to the correct tags.

(I will also post to mailing list and Discord)

Overpass query

Most of them would appear to just be putting the brand on, probably as you say, for rendering purposes.

Personally, I don’t think names are needed.

1 Like

I agree with @Fizzie41 ; they don’t appear to be names but are instead description.

I agree - most are pretty obviously not names but usually descriptions of either location and operator or a combination of the above.

Yes, that’s the reason some mappers put names onto the strangest objects… In the case of amenity=charging_station the names are no names: Tag:amenity=charging_station - OpenStreetMap Wiki

I agree - things that are unlikely to be names should be changed to “description”, and other tags used to record the information as suggested.

“Name” tags are often misused.

Same pointer as on the mailing list: SimonPoole's Diary | To name or not to name ... | OpenStreetMap while amenity=charging_station is not the worst offender, it is still pretty bad name-suggestion-index/charging_station.json at main · osmlab/name-suggestion-index · GitHub

Hi @tastrax,

I think it depends on the type of charger. If it’s ABC Service Station or XYZ Hotel and they have a charger on their site, as an ancillary feature to their primary business, that they self own and manage, I don’t think it needs a dedicated name.

If it’s ABC Restaurant and the company who installed/operates the charger is different, then the name should be included. If it’s a shopping centre which had many other tenants (all named, of which the charging operator is another tenant), or just an unnamed car park in a town (where the charging station is the only named feature), then the charger name is even more relevant.

The apps for the various charging networks all list a name for each of their sites, so there is a canonical name which can be used.

I would think this is all covered by brand. The apps that I use will typically display the brand plus a description of where the charger is located.


@Chuq In the second case Charles, what is the name? (Operator, Brand, Network?). This is actually an issue for the map renderer not OSM. They can choose to use any of the attributes attached to the charger data in OSM.

1 Like

That makes sense too. I was just going through my thought process when adding them - I’ll go with whatever the community thinks is most logical!

As a corollary, I’d like to see people’s opinions of other EV charger tags mentioned - so that we can at least be consistent:

One that throws me (a local one you’d be familiar with @tastrax) - the chargers at New Norfolk and Kempton - Options are: Bennett’s Petroleum, Mood Food, Bolt, and SmartCharge.

I would say Bennett’s Petroleum is the operator, Bolt is the brand, SmartCharge is the network. But the sites are best known as “Mood Food”!

For someone like EHT, they would be both the “operator” and “brand” with Chargefox the “network”.

What about Chargefox sites (e.g. Kings Meadows, Euroa, Gundagai) - where the respective local motoring club (e.g. RACT, RACV, NRMA) has the primary branding? I would be inclined to put Chargefox for operator, brand and network. But should the motoring club be the “brand”?

For Tesla superchargers, I would put:
operator = Tesla, Inc
brand = Tesla, Inc.
network = Tesla Supercharger

@Chuq Yep, it gets super confusing. Is the brand a marketing brand or the manufacturer brand (The wiki is not clear)? So in Tas are the EHT chargers branded as such or should they be Tritium/Veefil? Lots at the moment look to be marketing brands.

Charging Point wiki

Marketing branded charger

In the end I think most are using the name to just get a sensible label and to me this is clearly tagging for the renderer (usually) and I am partly OK with that if we can agree on some consistency. Maybe something like below?

Private business - name of the business? Mood Food - Kempton, Mood Food - New Norfolk, Pig and Whistle Hotel

An operator that wants publicity - EHT - Triabunna, EHT - Queenstown, Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, NRMA Fast Charger - Bloggsville, Tesla Destination Charger - Pig and Whistle Hotel

If none of the above required then maybe the network/ref as a fallback so that its unique (but these are likely in other attributes anyway) - Chargefox 5297, Tesla Destination Charger - Pig and Whistle Hotel

I will likely do a complete look at all Oz chargers if there is some consensus (there are only about 600 of them).

The way I understand it, brand= is for the brand that is being advertised to the user/customer (think of supermarkets). For tagging the manufacturer brand, manufacturer= can be used. (For example, the wiki recommends using it to tag defibrillator manufacturers.)

I haven’t added a new charger for a while… but have just done a couple. Intentionally left ‘Name’ empty In both cases it renders the value of ‘Network’ on the map: (note - disappears when I’m editing)

Interesting - Queenstown TAS shows the following in edit mode and no label in normal Carto map (using ID editor 2.25.1) .4108 is the ref number.

I suspect in edit mode the label may only show if it doesnt overlap some other feature (check Swansea - shows at level 20, Triabunna never shows anything)

I think in general editor software has it’s own logic when it comes to what is displayed on the screen. JOSM for example also shows the operator=* when no name=* is tagged.

What is displayed on a map which is generated out of OSM data is another story.

None of the above should be a decision criterion though when it comes to what tags are to be added to an object.

1 Like