Re: [Tagging] Light rail station tagging

[Paul Johnson]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Michael Tsang  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I tagged the public_transport=stop_position's on the light rail network
> in my
> region with railway=tram_stop, because the wiki mentions that "Insert a
> node
> with railway=tram_stop and name=* on the tram track (railway=tram) at the
> position where the stop is located." However, the light rail stations
> actually
> resembles "railway halts" (the layout is exactly the same as the image in
> the
> wiki, with only the station building missing), and I have also put a
> "railway=halt" (or "railway=station" for stations with switches) in the
> middle.
>
> This changeset attracted a comment "railway=tram_stop is probably a bad
> idea
> for the stop positions, causes rendering mess. Maybe better just to use
> railway=stop". What's the generally accepted practice for tagging light
> rail
> stations which resembles "railway stations" or "railway halts"?
>

Portland, Oregon has at least a hundred examples, if you want to scroll
around that light rail system.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Light rail station tagging

[Michael Tsang]

Dear all,

I tagged the public_transport=stop_position's on the light rail network in my 
region with railway=tram_stop, because the wiki mentions that "Insert a node 
with railway=tram_stop and name=* on the tram track (railway=tram) at the 
position where the stop is located." However, the light rail stations actually 
resembles "railway halts" (the layout is exactly the same as the image in the 
wiki, with only the station building missing), and I have also put a 
"railway=halt" (or "railway=station" for stations with switches) in the 
middle.

This changeset attracted a comment "railway=tram_stop is probably a bad idea 
for the stop positions, causes rendering mess. Maybe better just to use 
railway=stop". What's the generally accepted practice for tagging light rail 
stations which resembles "railway stations" or "railway halts"?

Michael
-- 
Sent from KMail


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Light-rail station

[Andrew Errington]

Hi all,

This light-rail station is above ground near an airport in South Korea.

http://osm.org/go/546KGWeqC--?m

I originally mapped the light rail (two tracks) and added a node at
each station point (so, two nodes per station, one in each direction).

A new mapper has done a nice job of the airport carpark, but has drawn
the station building outline and deleted the two sections of track
that went through it and one of the station nodes.  However, they have
added the building outline to a relation which represents the route.

Is this right?  Is there a better way?  Shouldn't the track be
continuous through the station building?

The reason for asking is that I'd like to show all station buildings
on this line like this.  They are mostly rectangular boxes with the
tracks running through, like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gimhae_lightrail_station.jpg

If everything is mostly ok what I'll probably do is copy the station
node tags to the building outline and delete the node.

Thank you,

Andrew

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light-rail station

[Martin Vonwald]

2012/5/31 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com:
 Hi all,

 This light-rail station is above ground near an airport in South Korea.

 http://osm.org/go/546KGWeqC--?m

 I originally mapped the light rail (two tracks) and added a node at
 each station point (so, two nodes per station, one in each direction).

 A new mapper has done a nice job of the airport carpark, but has drawn
 the station building outline and deleted the two sections of track
 that went through it and one of the station nodes.  However, they have
 added the building outline to a relation which represents the route.

 Is this right?

I'm not a railway expert, but I would say: no.

  Is there a better way?

I would say: yes.

  Shouldn't the track be
 continuous through the station building?

This is the better way IMO. The tracks are there, so why shouldn't
they be mapped? The building will need some special tagging, I guess
with some layer and special building tag, but I don't know those tags
by heart. I'm sure the wiki or someone more experienced with buildings
will point you in the right direction here.

 The reason for asking is that I'd like to show all station buildings
 on this line like this.  They are mostly rectangular boxes with the
 tracks running through, like this:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gimhae_lightrail_station.jpg

 If everything is mostly ok what I'll probably do is copy the station
 node tags to the building outline and delete the node.

For the correct tagging of the station, platforms, stops, etc. have a look at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport and follow the Railway link.

Hope it helps a little,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light-rail station

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/31 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com:
 I originally mapped the light rail (two tracks) and added a node at
 each station point (so, two nodes per station, one in each direction).


generally it is better to have only _one_ station where there is only
one station. Currently there are discussions on talk-de to draw
railway=station as polygons (not only the building but the whole part
that forms the station, often this includes open air parts as well).
The station building could get the tag building=train_station.


 A new mapper has done a nice job of the airport carpark, but has drawn
 the station building outline and deleted the two sections of track
 that went through it and one of the station nodes.  However, they have
 added the building outline to a relation which represents the route.


doesn't seem right to me. The tracks should connect and be there also
in those parts that are inside the station. I'd consider flagging
these parts additionally with covered=yes.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light-rail station

[fly]

Hey Andrew,

Your question would have been better asked at talk-tran...@osm.org
(mailing-list for public transport)

On 31/05/12 09:39, Martin Vonwald wrote:
 2012/5/31 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com:
 Hi all,

 This light-rail station is above ground near an airport in South Korea.

 http://osm.org/go/546KGWeqC--?m

 I originally mapped the light rail (two tracks) and added a node at
 each station point (so, two nodes per station, one in each direction).

With the new scheme (see below) these nodes are tagged with
public_transport=stop_position

 A new mapper has done a nice job of the airport carpark, but has drawn
 the station building outline and deleted the two sections of track
 that went through it and one of the station nodes.  However, they have
 added the building outline to a relation which represents the route.

 Is this right?
 
 I'm not a railway expert, but I would say: no.

Clearly no !

  Is there a better way?
 
 I would say: yes.
 
  Shouldn't the track be
 continuous through the station building?
 
 This is the better way IMO. The tracks are there, so why shouldn't
 they be mapped? The building will need some special tagging, I guess
 with some layer and special building tag, but I don't know those tags
 by heart. I'm sure the wiki or someone more experienced with buildings
 will point you in the right direction here.

add a higher layer tag than the tracks to the building (e.g. layer=1 if
no layer tag is used so far)

you can add nodes on the intersections between building and tracks and
split the tracks to add covered=yes to the parts inside the building.

 The reason for asking is that I'd like to show all station buildings
 on this line like this.  They are mostly rectangular boxes with the
 tracks running through, like this:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gimhae_lightrail_station.jpg

 If everything is mostly ok what I'll probably do is copy the station
 node tags to the building outline and delete the node.

reusing the nodes is better (see above).

There is also the possibility to use a relation (public_transport=stop_area)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:public_transport=stop_area

 For the correct tagging of the station, platforms, stops, etc. have a look at
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport and follow the Railway 
 link.

+10


Have fun
fly

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light rail station

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
 A light rail stop, would that be a railway=tram_stop or a railway=station?

Sounds like a third option is required. Here (Melbourne, Australia)
tram stops vary from just a sign on a telephone pole to super stops
(raised platforms, safety barriers and ticket machines) to former
train stations that now only serve light rails. The first are clearly
railway=tram_stop, the last are really railway=station (but it
would be misleading to render them exactly the same as a real train
station), but the super stops are really something else, some subclass
of tram_stop maybe.

Steve

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light rail station

[Martijn van Exel]

Where I come from[1], light rail is characterized by longer stop intervals
and right of way and dedicated infrastructure as a rule, compared to tram.
If that's not the same for the US, then it may not be a good idea to have
dedicated tagging for it.

Martijn

[1] That's generally a sensible reservation to include.

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:

 On 8/18/2011 11:18 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:

 John,

 Trams and light rail are two disparate things, in planning and
 construction, service, and embedding into the existing infrastructure.


 No they're not. Put light rail vehicles on what had been a tram line and
 suddenly it becomes light rail (example: Boston). Light rail is essentially
 a marketing term.


 __**_
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/tagginghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




-- 
martijn van exel
schaaltreinen.nl
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light rail station

[Martijn van Exel]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Richard Mann 
richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote:

 There's various systems that use railway=tram_stop. You tag what you
 like, but there's no guarantee anyone will pick up your data if you
 use something different. I don't know if that matters.


You mean to say that railway=tram_stop is the convention - if that's the
case then I'm happy to adhere to that.



 Some tram/light_rail systems run exclusively on-street, others use a
 bit of track, some are mostly on track (and probably have proper
 signalling). The distinctions are more technical than real. All of
 them cater for local journeys and are largely separate from whatever
 heavy rail system there is.


The distinction between tram and light rail that I pointed out in my reply
to Nathan is a real one, although there are definitely hybrid systems
(Amsterdam, Karlsruhe, Rotterdam/The Hague are examples I know of).


 The distinctions feel to me to be techy things that belong in
 sub-tags. If there are very fuzzy boundaries, it doesn't make sense to
 have too many categories.


I do agree there. Let's not overcomplicate things. By the context (the
tracks are tagged railway=light_rail) any tool could figure out that the
stops are light rail stops anyway.

Martijn

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

   Richard,
  Why 'should' they be a tram stop? Is that a convention I don't know
 about? I
  can't derive it from the descriptions in the wiki.
  The local situation here in Salt Lake is actually a little more
 complicated.
  TRAX is definitely a light rail system (With Siemens SD-100 and Avanto
 sets)
  but for significant stretches runs on former heavy rail trackbeds that
 the
  transit authority owned or bought the rights of way of. As far as I can
 tell
  the original heavy rail tracks are used, at least on some stretches. Of
  course new signaling and overhead wires were installed.
  Martijn
  On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Richard Mann
  richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Trams and street-running light rail should have railway=tram_stop. Put
  in a sub-tag if you want to distinguish different types.
 
  If your light-rail system runs onto heavy rail (eg famously in
  Karlsruhe), and shares stations with heavy rail passenger services,
  then use railway=station on the clearly heavy rail sections.
 
  I'd avoid using railway=light_rail in marginal cases - I think some
  people use it for S-bahn services (loco-hauled double-deck carriages;
  definitely not lightweight!), and the tagging isn't entirely helpful
 
  Richard
 
  On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com
  wrote:
   On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org
 wrote:
   A light rail stop, would that be a railway=tram_stop or a
   railway=station?
  
   Sounds like a third option is required. Here (Melbourne, Australia)
   tram stops vary from just a sign on a telephone pole to super stops
   (raised platforms, safety barriers and ticket machines) to former
   train stations that now only serve light rails. The first are clearly
   railway=tram_stop, the last are really railway=station (but it
   would be misleading to render them exactly the same as a real train
   station), but the super stops are really something else, some subclass
   of tram_stop maybe.
  
   Steve
  
   ___
   Tagging mailing list
   Tagging@openstreetmap.org
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
  
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 
  --
  martijn van exel
  schaaltreinen.nl
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




-- 
martijn van exel
schaaltreinen.nl
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light rail station

[Nathan Edgars II]

On 8/18/2011 1:49 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:

Where I come from[1], light rail is characterized by longer stop
intervals and right of way and dedicated infrastructure as a rule,
compared to tram. If that's not the same for the US, then it may not be
a good idea to have dedicated tagging for it.


http://www.lightrail.nl/NL/nl-tour.htm
The map of The Netherlands shows Light Rail in many forms, like the 
tramways of Amsterdam (I don't know how reliable this site is)



The big problem is that you can point to systems that are definitely 
higher-standard, and those that are definitely lower-standard, but 
there's no hard line between the two. The American Public Transportation 
Association recognizes this and lumps them together: 
http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/glossary.aspx Light Rail 
is a mode of transit service (also called streetcar, tramway, or 
trolley)...


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Light rail station

[Martijn van Exel]

The many hybrid systems (operating as tramways with shared right of way and
street level stops in inner cities and with dedicated infrastructure and
exclusive right of way - I mentioned some examples in another response)
don't make the situation any clearer. I am inclined to not expand the
tagging and use detail tags where necessary to clarify.

Martijn

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:

 On 8/18/2011 1:49 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:

 Where I come from[1], light rail is characterized by longer stop
 intervals and right of way and dedicated infrastructure as a rule,
 compared to tram. If that's not the same for the US, then it may not be
 a good idea to have dedicated tagging for it.


 http://www.lightrail.nl/NL/nl-**tour.htmhttp://www.lightrail.nl/NL/nl-tour.htm
 The map of The Netherlands shows Light Rail in many forms, like the
 tramways of Amsterdam (I don't know how reliable this site is)


 The big problem is that you can point to systems that are definitely
 higher-standard, and those that are definitely lower-standard, but there's
 no hard line between the two. The American Public Transportation Association
 recognizes this and lumps them together: http://www.apta.com/resources/**
 statistics/Pages/glossary.aspxhttp://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/glossary.aspxLight
  Rail is a mode of transit service (also called streetcar, tramway, or
 trolley)...




-- 
martijn van exel
schaaltreinen.nl
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging