I think I may have figured out what it is that the established tags can't do.
If you've got a railway=tram with a series of nice neat (and well-established) railway=tram_stop nodes then you can only make that railway=tram_stop node a member of a route relation once. The oxomoa conclusion was to have single-direction route relations. But this doesn't work well when you have lines that loop at the ends (fairly common with bus services), because the two relations overlap (you have to make certain nodes members in both relations, and that starts crossing a complexity/maintainability threshold). I think what we're edging towards is that expressing a tram stop as a single node isn't really enough. I think the open question is how tram stop pole nodes should be tagged, whether that affects highway=bus_stop, and how you deal with joint bus and tram stops. My suggestion: 1) highway=bus_stop - nodes to mark bus stop poles and to be members of bus relations (can also be used for tram relations) 2) highway=tram_stop - nodes to mark tram stop poles and to be members of tram relations (can also be used for bus relations). Renderers may prefer not to render these (there will generally be a railway=tram_stop node to use instead). There are only 13 of these in the world according to taginfo, so adoption of this tag for this purpose is unlikely to annoy anyone too much. 3) railway=tram_stop - nodes to mark the centre of the tram stop area, in the absence of a stop area relation. Mostly for rendering/labelling purposes. Can be used as a member of uni-directional relations, if setting up highway=tram_stop nodes is viewed as too complicated. Richard _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
