Hi Michael, that's very helpful, thanks. I'll implement the ref as well as the ordering. I'll also add this to the English wiki pages where needed. I'll have a look at the DE page as well.
Examples for nodes as requested. Stop_position at: - End of platform (middle of line) node 13328915 - End of platform (end of line) node 20955753 - Middle of platform node 1620401529 (Disclaimer: I was just adding tags for 13328915, but I'll fix this shortly to be in the center of the platform. IMHO that is the convention that does make sense from a passengers perspective, but yes, it doesn't address Colin's comments about physical stop train positions from the drivers perspective.) Many thanks, Bjoern On 12 May 2017 at 15:48, Michael Reichert <naka...@gmx.net> wrote: > Hi Bjoern, > > Am 2017-05-10 um 18:59 schrieb Bjoern Hassler: > > In an osm:relation:route > > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/relation:route> (type=route, > > route=train/...), you have both platforms and stop positions. How is a > > particular platform associated with a stop that serves it? > > > > E.g. for public transport routing, you'd walk (highway=footway) to a > > platform (public_transport=platform), at which point you'd change to a > > train stopping at a stop (public_transport=stop_position). How would the > > routing algorithm know that the platform is associated with the stop? > > > > Is there an existing mechanism or convention, e.g. a tag on the platform > > that indicates the stop, or both tagged with the same name or similar? > > Stop positions can have a tag ref=* or local_ref=* giving the track > number which is signed on the platform. The platform has ref=*, too. The > ref tag of the platform often contains multiple numbers because many > platforms have to edges, i.e. ref=2;3 or even worse: ref=2a;2b;2;3a;3b;3 > (if the track can be occupied by two trains behind each other at the > same time – very common at busy stations). > > If you don't want to parse ref=*/local_ref=* and route relations are > properly mapped, you can check which route relations reference a > platform. If a route relation contains both platforms and stop > positions, the next member of a relation after a stop position node is > should be the platform. > > I think that both variants provide better results than simple snapping > on the next edge in your pedestrian routing graph (if platforms are in > your routing graph). There are cases in reality where a railway track > has platforms on both sides but you can or must leave the train only to > one direction. > > > PS I've noticed that sometimes the stop position is at the far end of a > > platform (i.e. the two stop positions are at opposite ends of the > station). > > Maybe that's so that an association can be made? > > From my point of view this is wrong mapping. (In Germany mainly done by > user rayquaza) To give a correct answer, you should give some examples > (node IDs). > > Best regards > > Michael > > -- > Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten > ausgenommen) > I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
