Proposal:Deprecate man made=drinking fountain

Deprecate man made=drinking fountain
Proposal status:	Rejected (inactive)
Proposed by:	Mateusz Konieczny
Draft started:	2022-10-11
RFC start:	2022-10-11
Vote start:	2022-11-04
Vote end:	2022-11-18

Proposal

Recommend to cease using man_made=drinking_fountain and document it as deprecated at OSM Wiki. And recommend not supporting this value in OSM editors as valid value.

Rationale

This tag has some problems

• Vast majority of drinking fountains qualify also for man_made=water_tap which is more popular and conflicting with tag.
• This tag is defined in the same way as fountain=bubbler but without conflict with man_made=water_tap
• This tag is named "drinking fountain" but defined to be valid only for subset of drinking fountains
• "drinking fountain" term is very differently understood by various people from various countries. There was a long discussion with people having drastically different opinions what qualifies as drinking fountain. Such unclearly defined tag is a poor fit.

Note that some at least dispute these claims and recently there is a very active discussion about tagging of such features.

In my opinion tagging details of drinking water providers have many problems and require cleanup, but this tag is especially confusion generating for no benefit.

It is also not in widespread use.

Tagging

fountain=bubbler and fountain=drinking and man_made=water_tap are possible for marking detail of amenity=drinking_water - though many have own (smaller) problems and may also benefit from redesign.

This proposal is NOT approving them or affirming their good design, maybe fountain=bubbler and/or fountain=drinking also would benefit from being replaced.

Examples

Following two images are examples of objects causing problems.

Listed as drinking fountain at Tag:fountain=drinking - and qualifies also for man_made=water_tap

Listed as drinking fountain at Key:fountain and qualifies also for man_made=water_tap

Some people claim that these are not drinking fountains, some people claim that these are drinking fountains - exemplifying in turn "unclear definition" problem (proposed to be solved by not using man_made=drinking_fountain).

See poll that seems to confirm that this classification is really unclear, with people divided on whether it applies to such objects. In my opinion this makes this tag confusing, having little value and likely to result in confusion and repeated discussions leading nowhere.

These drinking fountains are qualifying also for man_made=water_tap resulting in tag conflict (proposed to be solved by not using man_made=drinking_fountain).

See also http://rete.comuni-italiani.it/foto/2008/102690/view from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127149072

Alternative solutions

listed here

split to separate page to make clear that this proposal is not proposing this alternative solutions: feel free to make own competing proposal using these ideas! Maybe it will be better than this one. But I proposed this version as I consider alternatives to be inferior or impossible. If this proposal fails, then I am not planning to make an alternative one.

Alternative solutions known to me require clearly deciding whether things like [1] and [2] are drinking fountains or not.

Features/Pages affected

man_made=drinking_fountain - maybe also some mentions at related pages

External discussions

Potential deprecation was being discussed in https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-October/thread.html#65730

I notified about deprecation attempt all mappers who used it more than once for features present at 9 October 2022, around 20:00 UTC time (I used https://codeberg.org/matkoniecz/who-added-this-tag ). See list at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain#Deprecation

RFC was posted in https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-October/thread.html#65990

Comments

Please comment on the discussion page.

Voting

Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was rejected with 25 votes for, 14 votes against and 2 abstentions.

• I approve this proposal. I think that man_made=drinking_fountain tagging is not helping as this term has no clear consistent definition, with interpretation varying wildly - and I would consider it as a trap for potential data users and mappers --Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. while not particularly useful if you are into details, it could eventually serve as a fallback tag to say it is actually a drinking fountain, when a specific (drinking) fountain tag is not understood by the data consumer. Maybe not that useful, but I’ll rather leave this judgement to the mappers than to the voters. —-Dieterdreist (talk) 16:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I've used this tag many times, to help describe the physical item from which amenity=drinking_water is available. (Other possibilities are man_made=water_tap, man_made=water_well, and natural=spring -- and more, I imagine.) I appreciate Mateusz's bringing the possible ambiguity of the term "drinking fountain" to our attention. I would have tagged both of the Italian fountains pictured as man_made=water_tap, but if these are commonly known in Europe as drinking fountains then we may indeed have a problem. I personally will stop using man_made=drinking_fountain pending clarification, but I feel this call for deprecation without specifying a superior tagging scheme is heavy-handed and incomplete. Jmapb (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. -- Something B (talk) 17:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. Jrachi (talk) 17:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jrachi: - can you clarify why you are opposing? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal.I support the proposal and would like to appeal for the more precise specification of drinking water to improve and use the `fountain` tag. Mcliquid (talk) 18:03, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. I find both pictures to be drinking fountains (and agree that it seems that interpretation varies wildly, which is IMHO main reason to remove it as it adds only confusion instead of extra details to the map). One should use more specific tags to map details (like the ones mentioned by Jmapb, fountain=* as well as handle=*,actuator=*,pump=*,valve=* etc.) or if those are not available (or the mapper doesn't care enough) map it just as amenity=drinking_water --mnalis (talk) 18:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. I feel this is a redundant and confusing tag, it is true that the tagging of these kinds of features is very murky, but I think that starting to simplify them by removing such things will make things easier to improve. I would consider both those fountains as drinking fountains and I'd tag them as fountain=drinking rather than man_made=water_tap. --Davidoskky (talk) 18:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Fizzie41 (talk) 21:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --AntMadeira (talk) 00:45, 5 November 2022 (UTC) Finally, a good initiative to put some order in the fountain/drinking elements.
• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I am concerned that this proposal is deprecating tags without giving guidance to mappers on what the alternative should be. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 17:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is not ideal. One of my limitations is that at this point I am unsure what exactly this tag is expressing or even intended to express. I initially thought that it is supposed to be expressing difference from man_made=water_tap but then people told me that water fountain where user pushes button to trigger water flow is also a water tap. I thought that it is for places where there is a gentle upward water stream (and useless for filling water bottles) but then I learned that many people consider this as a drinking fountain. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. Cz ja The example photos do not show the meaning of the tag, just a tap of some water. (talk) 10:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Cz ja: - the problem is that about half of people thinks differently, and considers it as example of drinking fountain (see this poll). As result this makes this tag highly confusing Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:19, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --501ghost (talk) 12:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Diacritic (talk) 06:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Lejun (talk) 08:52, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Tjuro (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. The 2 photographic examples look to the 'taps' more suited to filling a bucket than directly drinking from. And the proposal has no solution, I can only conjecture that taps and things that are easy to drink from and probably any other water supply are all to be lumped together as "drinking_fountains". Fine if you don't want to distinguish between them. The "unclearly defined tag" is objected to due to it clearly removing taps .. so it is not "unclear" at all. The poll has 38 votes ... and possibly most of those are not native British English speakers? The 'tap' as part of the thing, yes there is a control device, but just as a amenity=shower has a control device that some may call a 'tap', but more correctly called 'valve', OSM assumes that these ancillaries may be part of the primary feature. I could go on .. and on but the basic question is 'how are these two devices to be tagged so they can be separated?'. This proposal is no solution. --Warin61 (talk) 07:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Some dictionary definitions of 'drinking fountain'?

• Cambridge (UK) a device, usually in a public place, that can send up a flow of water for drinking
• Macquarie (Australia) a small fountain that ejects a jet of water into a drinker's mouth
• Websters (USA) a fixture with nozzle that delivers a stream of water for drinking
• Oxford Learners (UK) a device that supplies water for drinking in public places (no access to the professional Oxford Dictionary, I suspect it is more precise that this)

Warin61 (talk) 08:33, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

[3] and [4] are not designed to be comfortably drunk from. They are taps not drinking fountains. Possibly the old meaning of "fountain" - a source of water, and the word "drinking" meaning water safe to consume have been confused with more modern meaning. I would think most languages would have a more precise translation of tap rather than a old generic term. Warin61 (talk) 13:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. Although I believe the term "drinking fountain" should be perfectly clear to native English speakers, I can see that it does not translate clearly to other languages. The example photos on this page are not drinking fountains. I would vote yes on a proposal deprecating this tag and clearly specifying replacement tags. Deprecating by itself doesn't seem helpful though. -- Ezekielf (talk) 19:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I think this should not become an official tag because we can come up with other replacement tags for this, since "Drinking fountain" can be replaced with something like "fountain=drinking" --Traveleditor (talk) 21:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't understand your message. You say this should not become an official tag, but the vote is to deprecate this tag and not to approve it. --Davidoskky (talk) 13:05, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --EneaSuper (talk) 11:44, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. We already have tags for recording the potability of generic fountains and and water taps. I do not see any point in depreciating a tag specifically for fountains usually operating on demand that are arranged to deliver drinking water directly to the user. Most drinking fountains aren't proper fountains and also don't function well as taps.--InsertUser (talk) 13:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

The point is that what you think and mark as "drinking fountain", is vastly different from what someone else thinks and marks as "drinking fountain", as shown in Rationale and Examples. At this point in time, it is irrelevant what is correct dictionary definition in which country; what is relevant is when one sees man_made=drinking_fountain one can not draw any conclusion about what the original mapper was intending to map (your definition or someone else definition). Thus, the tag is ambiguous and confusing and serves no purpose, and should be deprecated as the first step in cleaning up the confusion (like adding unambiguous fountain=* tag for example). --mnalis (talk) 13:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

And you have also completly missed my point. What I described does not fall under the description of "a fountain" and does not fall under the description of "a tap". It is a third thing that does however fall under the broader definition of drinking fountain. Deprecating drinking fountain only serves to encourage mistagging of these objects as something that they aren't for the sake of mistranslation. --InsertUser (talk) 15:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

unambiguous fountain=* tag ... meaning fountain=drinking ? .. That is a tap! There is no suggested replacement .. so there is no suggestion of an unambiguous replacement. None! Warin61 (talk) 09:49, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --JB (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. The proposal does not offer a replacement that would preserve the distinction between water taps (man_made=water_tap) and drinking fountains. fountain=* is not suitable since amenity=fountain is for decorative and recreational fountains, not for supplying water for drinking (whether or not the water used is in fact potable), and in any case would allow for nonsensical combinations. As for the examples, (3) has a rotary lever faucet so is clearly a water tap; (4) is more ambiguous (it appears to have a push faucet, so presumably only dispenses a small amount of water before shutting off automatically) and the answer would depend on how it functions and how it is used in practice (whether or not people drink from it directly). --Ecatmur (talk) 15:22, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Reino Baptista (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Coolawik (talk) 17:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. A drinking fountain is normal english and can have several physical manifestations - suppply of human potable water is the decider. --TonyS (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

We have (much more popular) amenity=drinking_water (which is also actually supported in your favourite apps) for marking supply of human potable water. --mnalis (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --scai (talk) 21:42, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. because the confusement may because the direct translation "drinking fountain"(en) ->" Trinkbrunnen" is a false friend. A Trinkbrunnen in Germany can also be a water tap. man_made=drinking_fountain should not be deprecated but clarified to be meant for something were people supposely shall comfortable drink from a water source without using a bottle but direct into the mouth.
• I approve this proposal. 3 & 4 I both do not consider fountains at all - for me they're water taps. --Hike&Map (talk) 02:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

--Agent redd (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. It's commonly called 'drinking_fountain' in certain cultures, but I think it's the properties that matter, not the names. Depending on the culture, the name may be different and the shape may be different, but the property is that it is a facility designed to provide water to humans. In East Asia where there is no 'fountain' culture, it would never be called a 'fountain'. And in East Asia, we're going to give it a completely different name for doing the same thing. But we can't make a tag just for East Asia, can we? --깨몽/dreamy (talk) 04:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --Jeff254 (talk) 05:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I've used this tag a few times, to help describe the physical item from which amenity=drinking_water is available. I think it’s a great feature, especially because I like micro mapping. --CatSu (talk) 05:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. -- (i) the proposed alternative ("bubbler") is a rare regional term, that doesn't suggest anything to those who aren't familiar, while the meaning of "drinking fountain" is obvious from its constituent parts. (ii) some drinking fountains are, or are attached to water taps. Some aren't I suggest if you can easily fill a glass/bottle, "water_tap" is appropriate, if you can easily drink from it (normally because the water flows upwards) "drinking_fountain" is appropriate. If it appears designed for both, tag both. ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 09:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisHodgesUK: regarding "tag both": how exactly do you propose to map man_made=drinking_fountain and man_made=water_tap at the same time?

Also everyone, could you please in your vote (regardless if yes or no) also answer "In addition to regular vote: can you mention whether [3] and [4] are drinking fountains or not?" as asked in voting section? (as the issue is exactly that what is obvious to one mapper, exact opposite is also obvious to another one, and we need to gather statistics). Thanks! --mnalis (talk) 12:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

@Mnalis: This isn't the only time features are on top of each other. You'd probably need 2 nodes, one for the tap, and one for the part you drink directly from. You've made some good points, but this proposal isn't a solution - taps and drinking fountains aren't the same thing. Instead we should clarify you can drink direction from a drinking fountain. As for suggesting a term (bubbler) that means nothing to most people, that isn't helpful at all. ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I'm not a big fan of duplicate nodes in that format... But I'm certainly not the one suggesting the term "bubbler" (as neither "drinking fountain" nor "bubbler" makes any sense in my language), but I am quite disappointed by the low percentage of people actually answering what the proposal is asking them to do -- which is to clearly declare their opinion of the two pictures: e.g. "According to me, left picture in this proposal is drinking fountain, but right one isn't" (or any other combination, of course). Would you improve that average, @ChrisHodgesUK: by declaring which of the two pictures you would call "drinking fountain"? Both? Neither? Only left one? Only right one? --mnalis (talk) 22:45, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

@Mnalis: I answered the question at the other poll, but for completeness the left is definitely a water_tap (because you can't drink directly from it). The right is probably also just a water_tap but against the background of trees it's hard to completely rule out the possibility of an upward stream to drink from in that photo. ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 09:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. I'd consider [3] and [4] drinking fountains. --Eginhard (talk) 22:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Markkerrigan (talk) 16:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal.I consider [3] and [4] as drinking fountains --KoiAndBlueBird (talk) 19:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --R2d (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I feel that there needs first to an attempt at consensus on alternatives. Concerned the fountain tag will be used for drinking water --JassKurn (talk) 15:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. The alternative bubbler does not sound like proper British English. --drolbr (talk) 17:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Ivanbranco (talk) 00:54, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. However proper replacement tags should be made clearer. --Jonathan Haas (talk) 08:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)