Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sorry for asking so late, but why should we deprecate mapping subway stations > with a relation or a way and insist on nodes? There are already a significant > number of stations mapped like this. I would also not write: "The location of > the node is irrelevant." or "There is nothing wrong with putting the node > near its entrance: it does not affect routing or anything else." but explain > more careful where the node should be put, and what it's meant to know (if it > wouldn't affect anything we could also not put it, no?).
Subway stations are mostly underground and, unlike overground stations, are a set of disjoint facilities joined by tunnels, invisible on satellite imagery. Nobody except the architect or a security employee can draw a polygon for underground station properly: you don't usually see service rooms or know how wide the tunnel is, and very few people, maybe less than ten in the whole world, would actually go with a laser ruler to measure angles and distances required for mapping an underground facility. Then, having stations as polygons or multipolygons makes managing a stop_area and route relations much harder to manage. I don't know about iD, but in JOSM it takes several clicks to select a multipolygon. And with sparse editing techniques, you can't be sure whether a station exists if it's drawn with a multipolygon. 536 subway stations in the world are mapped with polygons, which makes for 4,5% of all metro stations. 421 of these (78%) also have building=* tags. I consider tagging a building a station a bad practice, for the building can have e.g. a different name or a different operator. Sharing an object between features is frowned upon, and I don't want to encourage this practice by allowing station tags on a polygon. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element Ilya _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
