On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 at 09:35, Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Apologies for breaking the thread, but I was unable to connect to > Tagging & missed the initial message in my email client. > > I'm the user in disagreement. (Although reading the current > railway=station wiki page I'm not convinced there's an genuine > alternative belief). > > I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of > railway=stations are mapped as nodes: > Node Way Relation > IT 2878 400 15 > DE 4388 39 45 > FR 2553 646 14 > JP 9063 5 11 > US 4140 174 8 > I don't think that makes the point moot since nodes are just a quick first pass way to map a station, eventually they should all be upgraded to areas. The same way you can map a building as a node as a first pass, a footprint area is always better. I edited a copy of the diagram (A-simple-station.svg) of a station > layout, primarily to remove any references to PTv2 tags, a completely > independent, duplicating tagging schema, irrelevant to anything to do > with the railway=station tag. I also amended the area indicating what > roughly constitutes a 'railway station' according to the wiki. This is > the only page I uploaded the image to. (It's not complete - the creation > of the PNG image removes the angled text I used) > > It appears that in 2015 a user took it upon himself to wholesale rewrite > the wiki page, based on discussions in OpenRailwayMap IRC, a small > clique group that keeps no record of any conclusions. If anyone knows if > discussions took place on a major, wider reaching forum, please indicate > them. > > Tagging objects should be based on the understanding of what the general > consumer of OSM accept it to be, not just a small group of "rail > enthusiasts" from Germany. > OSM should as much as possible try to remain agnostic towards a specific audience or use, we should strive to both be accurate and usable for both train drivers and public transport passengers. This is not just a matter for rail enthusiasts from Germany. > >the railway is from the rail network/infrastructure point of view and > public > transit from the passenger point of view. > > This seems to be a common misunderstanding by those advocating PTv2. > I'm not advocating PTv2, for a long time it just seemed like duplication of tags and a waste but if the ability to separate out the rail infrastructure from passenger viewpoint can be done with the tagging schema then that's maybe one advantage. > Railway=station is the original tag for all stations, including > passenger. Introducing a disparate schema at a later date, does not > change the meaning of the original tag. > > > In practice many are mapped as the same area, but that's usually only > because unless you're a train operator it can be hard to actually survey > where the station starts and ends from the train network point of view. > > No, it's because the public area is what most people consider to be a > 'station'. (& most are mapped as nodes) > Maybe a solution is to keep railway=station and public_transport=station both defined as the passenger view, but use a new tag for rail infrastructure so you can still correctly map the station for train drivers. The downside is that's an extra tagging schema to make things even more complicated.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
