Proposal - RFC - Use model to describe fountains

I’m proposing to use the key model to describe fountain models and to deprecate some inconsistent values of fountain=*

Please, discuss about it on the wiki discussion page or here.
If you’re not scared; there is a long discussion about fountains going on in the mailing list, so you might take a look at that!

1 Like

Without reading the whole mailing list discussion, why is the rare fountain=drinking tag used instead of amenity=drinking_water?

From the Key:fountain wiki page it looks like some fountain values are used with amenity=drinking_water to describe the type of drinking fountain.

A quick Overpass query tells me that there are 1,405 cases of amenity=drinking_water + fountain=*, 135 of which specifically use fountain=drinking.
Personally I think fountain=drinking adds zero information to objects already tagged with amenity=drinking_water and can be considered to be redundant, even more so when a documented model=* tag is present.

What would be the syntax for wikidata? The wikidata for model=toret (Turin’s fountain style) is Q3993741 and in Turin city there are at the moment:

25 wikidata=Q3993741
15 fountain:wikidata=Q3993741
9 subject:wikidata=Q3993741

according to the proposed syntax I guess this confusion would be replaced with just model:wikidata=Q3993741, right?

1 Like

I do not encourage this kind of Wikidata tagging, but since I can’t stop anyone from doing it anyway, here are my 2 cents on the topic:

The fountain is the main feature that is being described in more detail by the other tags, I think subject:wikidata=Q3993741 would be the most fitting and in line with other uses of this key. wikidata=* is for the object itself, so if one specific fountain has its own wikidata item it would be that.

1 Like

it specifies that it is not water well or spring without dedicated drinking apparatus

File:Water well in Kerala.jpg - Wikimedia Commons and File:SalfeinsSpring.jpg - OpenStreetMap Wiki also can be amenity=drinking_water (unless also qualifies as fountain=drinking?)

that would be wrong, fountain is not about its model

model:wikidata=Q3993741? style:wikidata=Q3993741?

It is supposed to provide some extra information, such as how the drinking water is distributed.
Optionally, the tag drinking_water=yes can be added to be more explicit, but this is not necessary since fountain=drinking implies drinking_water=yes running overpass I found 124 instances of such objects.

Depending of the person tagging (since the tagging scheme isn’t extremely clear about it) these can be tagged either as amenity=fountain, fountain=drinking or as amenity=drinking_water, fountain=drinking, overpass run with all amenity=fountain equivalent values counts are respectively 275 and 1195.

On the wiki talk page the use of model=* has been criticized since it would relate to the specific model of a fountain and not to its general style. Thus, the problem would be that if the same kind of fountains were manufactured in two different moments in time, say with 20 years in between, the models would differ even though the style of the fountain would remain more or less the same.

It has been proposed to use a different name for the key, such as fountain:design=*, which I do find appropriate.

Moreover, the design tag already exists and that could be used as well, however it is solely defined for the design of poles and pylons carrying high voltage electricity cables at the moment.
It could be proposed to edit the definition of design=* and use it to describe the design of other features, such as fountains.
This would solve the model problem, since even though a few technical changes are applied to the manufacturing process the design of the object remains the same, while the model changes.

At the moment, nobody is tagging specific models of fountains and there currently appears to be no interest in doing so, thus using the model=* tag shouldn’t be too bad. This might change in the future however.

What do you think about those proposals?

it specifies that it is not water well or spring without dedicated drinking apparatus

Yes, there are 2762 amenity=drinking_water with natural=spring

There are also 11k combinations with water_well.

Cheers Martin

1 Like

that would be wrong, fountain is not about its model

model:wikidata=Q3993741? style:wikidata=Q3993741?

IMHO this is the wrong direction of tagging. It means one will be completely depending on software support, presets etc. because nobody can remember these codes (well, I can’t, maybe someone can).

If one can use a tag like fountain=nasone they don’t have a need for the repetition of this in gibberish. It looks to me as if you weren’t trusting our tags. We can have a hint in the wiki that fountain=nasone is about the wikidata item xy, and can refrain from repeating this all over the place, and data users can still have their linked data.

We are already doing this (wikidata links, although it is now completely hidden since it was removed from the template)

Cheers Martin


I entirely agree with that

Agreed, I don’t feel like tagging the wikidata link is really necessary.
But I also don’t think that people will be completely reliant on software, since model=nasone will always be there tagged explicitly and nobody wants to remove that.
I do not think additional information is necessarily bad, as long as it is not redundant, inconsistent or causes problems with other affirmed tags.
Thus, including wikidata information, or asking how it could be included, doesn’t look bad to me.

I completely agree with this, but still data repetition doesn’t look so bad to me if someone wants to proceed in a different way.

My question wasn’t “should we create a wikidata tag for this?” (for which I could agree with you), but more “can we standardize this tag, since - willing or not - is already in use?”.

The toret wiki page suggests already to use subject:wikidata:

You can eventually add subject:wikidata=Q3993741 to connect to the Wikidata toret entity.

Then, since 1. subject doesn’t seem to be the right tag as Mateusz pointed out and 2. seems like there’s consensus about the wikidata being unnecessary
should we edit the wiki so that tag isn’t suggested anymore?

maybe the toret mappers like the wikidata addition, I do not think it is harmful, just superfluous, I’d definitely first approach who put it there, and see what they think.

I have edited my proposal to use the key fountain:design=* this makes more sense since the objective is to describe the general design of the fountain and not the specific model.
I do acknowledge that this makes tagging the wikidata a bit more difficult, I guess it could be either fountain:design:wikidata=* or more simply design:wikidata=*.

I will let at least two weeks pass from now before initiating a vote, since this is a big change to my original proposal and I want to see where discussion takes us.

1 Like

or even better, without wikidata tags duplicating other OSM tags


Voting has now started Use Model To Describe fountains proposal - OpenStreetMap Wiki