Then give a definition, rather than telling me mine is wrong. 99% of the jackasses who do that would argue with any definition I give, so there's no point in me wasting my time.
I get it, you are the self-appointed guardian of "toilet to tap" and argue with anyone who uses that phrase.
Here's your definition.
"Toilet to tap" programs are those in which the treated sewage is directly used as the input into the water treatment plant.
The phrase "toilet to tap" is pejorative; the intent is to make people opposed to the process of recycling water directly from the sewage treatment plants. The phrase is also used by journalists hoping to attract attention to their article.
Less disparaging terms are those like "recycled water", "water re-use", "water reclamation" and so on.
Some people consider discharging the treated water upstream to the cities water intake to be "toilet to tap", or also the process where the treated water is put into holding ponds that also serve as water intake. Those are called the same terms with the word "indirect" added, such as "indirect recycled water".
No one calls the case of upstream cities sewage (treated or untreated) being dumped into a river that downstream cities use for their water intake to be "toilet to tap". That's just traditional practice, and is called "pollution" in the case of untreated sewage.
Here is a journal article that discusses it in more detail.
http://journal.sjdm.org/14/141...