Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station
Hey We already have public_transport=stop_area and the site-relation in use with stations. For the buildings with several levels we even have level-relations. As these areas are sometimes quite complex we won't be able to map them all in a simple way. cu fly On 18.12.2013 21:58, Richard Mann wrote: The number of stations is quite small, so people will find a way to deal with it. Probably by re-adding nodes until the area advocates give up. On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.fr mailto:coprogram...@yahoo.fr wrote: OK! Just one question: what do you mean saying Having separate node and area doesn't usually create too many problems ? Currently, either a node or an area is created to define a railway station, isn't it ? So there is never separate node and area in the same station. Is there something I didn't understand ? Zigeuner Le Mercredi 18 décembre 2013 10h49, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com a écrit : The label role would be a solution, but unfortunately it isn't supported by the major renderers (afaik). So for the moment we stick with having the tags on the label node. Since the label is usually fairly obvious, having separate node and area doesn't usually create too many problems. So the main reason for change would be to fit in with a some mappers desire for everything to be tied up neatly in relations. That's not really a good enough reason. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. Richard On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.fr mailto:coprogram...@yahoo.fr wrote: Thank you for your answers. I was also inclined to add railway=station tag to a node rather than to an area. But some French mappers advocate for the 'area' solution, contrary to the former version of the wiki, and I've begun to hesitate between both the approaches. So I was hoping this debate could be settled, but currently this is clearly not the case... Doesn't this matter interest anybody else ? Or doesn't anybody else have an opinion about this question ? This problem is not know (see place=*). We even already have an solution: role label. The role label could be interesting, but how can we use it ? Did you mean we could create a label relation [1] ? Or did you mean we should add a node with the role label to the stop_area relation which would be tagged railway=station (but the stop_area could also contain a bus station, a subway station, etc.) ? For new created objects I only use the new scheme but I do not delete the older tags if already tagged but only add the new ones. So I think it means you add the public_transport=station tag to the same node/area which was already tagged railway=station (as Roland did), doesn'it ? Cheers, Zigeuner [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station
I like the area approach. If you were on a platform, or in the station building, or on the tracks, each time you are in the railway station (or is it on the station when you are outside, and in the station when you are in the building?). So if there is an app that tells you where you are at the moment, area would help the app be more precise. If there was a public transport routing app, it could determine which station you are on, and immediately show you departure and arrival times. Janko 2013/12/18 Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.fr Thank you for your answers. I was also inclined to add railway=station tag to a node rather than to an area. But some French mappers advocate for the 'area' solution, contrary to the former version of the wiki, and I've begun to hesitate between both the approaches. So I was hoping this debate could be settled, but currently this is clearly not the case... Doesn't this matter interest anybody else ? Or doesn't anybody else have an opinion about this question ? This problem is not know (see place=*). We even already have an solution: role label. The role label could be interesting, but how can we use it ? Did you mean we could create a label relation [1] ? Or did you mean we should add a node with the role label to the stop_area relation which would be tagged railway=station (but the stop_area could also contain a bus station, a subway station, etc.) ? For new created objects I only use the new scheme but I do not delete the older tags if already tagged but only add the new ones. So I think it means you add the public_transport=station tag to the same node/area which was already tagged railway=station (as Roland did), doesn'it ? Cheers, Zigeuner [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station
The number of stations is quite small, so people will find a way to deal with it. Probably by re-adding nodes until the area advocates give up. On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.frwrote: OK! Just one question: what do you mean saying Having separate node and area doesn't usually create too many problems ? Currently, either a node or an area is created to define a railway station, isn't it ? So there is never separate node and area in the same station. Is there something I didn't understand ? Zigeuner Le Mercredi 18 décembre 2013 10h49, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com a écrit : The label role would be a solution, but unfortunately it isn't supported by the major renderers (afaik). So for the moment we stick with having the tags on the label node. Since the label is usually fairly obvious, having separate node and area doesn't usually create too many problems. So the main reason for change would be to fit in with a some mappers desire for everything to be tied up neatly in relations. That's not really a good enough reason. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. Richard On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.frwrote: Thank you for your answers. I was also inclined to add railway=station tag to a node rather than to an area. But some French mappers advocate for the 'area' solution, contrary to the former version of the wiki, and I've begun to hesitate between both the approaches. So I was hoping this debate could be settled, but currently this is clearly not the case... Doesn't this matter interest anybody else ? Or doesn't anybody else have an opinion about this question ? This problem is not know (see place=*). We even already have an solution: role label. The role label could be interesting, but how can we use it ? Did you mean we could create a label relation [1] ? Or did you mean we should add a node with the role label to the stop_area relation which would be tagged railway=station (but the stop_area could also contain a bus station, a subway station, etc.) ? For new created objects I only use the new scheme but I do not delete the older tags if already tagged but only add the new ones. So I think it means you add the public_transport=station tag to the same node/area which was already tagged railway=station (as Roland did), doesn'it ? Cheers, Zigeuner [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station
Thank you for your answers. I was also inclined to add railway=station tag to a node rather than to an area. But some French mappers advocate for the 'area' solution, contrary to the former version of the wiki, and I've begun to hesitate between both the approaches. So I was hoping this debate could be settled, but currently this is clearly not the case... Doesn't this matter interest anybody else ? Or doesn't anybody else have an opinion about this question ? This problem is not know (see place=*). We even already have an solution: role label. The role label could be interesting, but how can we use it ? Did you mean we could create a label relation [1] ? Or did you mean we should add a node with the role label to the stop_area relation which would be tagged railway=station (but the stop_area could also contain a bus station, a subway station, etc.) ? For new created objects I only use the new scheme but I do not delete the older tags if already tagged but only add the new ones. So I think it means you add the public_transport=station tag to the same node/area which was already tagged railway=station (as Roland did), doesn'it ? Cheers, Zigeuner [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station
Hi, 1. Position of tag railway=station There are currently two approaches [1]: (i) on a node within the main concourse area (ii) on an area encompassing the land used for passenger services (including any concourse, platforms and associated tracks) I strongly opt for (i). As you have mentioned, for both the exact placment is subjective. But the single node is far easier to understand and handle for mappers. For example, you could tell a mapper that the node is the location where label is placed. By contrast, to start a mapper's introduction with a lengthy explanation of the computation of a centroid is not practical. If you want a really precise station description, I would go towards indoor mapping, see http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Indoor_Mapping In-station navigation could be a strength of OSM if enough stations are mapped. N.B. A third approach is presented on the wiki [2]: tagging the building. This approach seems not appropriate, since the bulding(s) often doesn't cover the whole station surface (e.g. platform area). Maybe it could be removed frome the wiki ? Yes, remove it from the wiki. A lot of stations even don't have a building. 2. Use of public_transport=station This is a much debated point: [...] (ii) public_transport=station should be added to the one object that is tagged railway=station, since these tags are synonymous [...] Same question: is there one of these four approaches that should be favoured ? Clearly (ii) is the best choice. Even the public transport proposal states that the tags should be used alongside the existing tags. In general, a mapper and also a tool would usually just left aside unknown tags, so (ii) keeps tools working regarless on what tagging they depend. Having two distinct objects would be difficult to understand, because which object you get will then depend on the tools syntax (either one of them or both), and nobody expects a second difficult-to-find shadow object to exist. Cheers, Roland ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
