On 11/10/2020 08:16, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Are you mapping train stations as areas? From reading your replies
here the impression I get is you are advocating for not extending the
representation from a node to an area, right? I do not understand why
you are fighting so hard to make a tag useless/superfluous (same
meaning as public_transport=station) which you do not even use in this
way, and without offering an alternative,
1. I'm not. I amended a graphic to correspond with the wiki text:"
places where customers can access railway services or where goods are
loaded and unloaded.". Nothing about signals/points half a mile away.
It's you who's "fighting so hard " against the definition.
2. PT tags have no influence on railway=*.
3. Alternative: landuse=railway., of which railway=station is a subset.
if you require signals/points to be within a polygon (it's still unclear
why this is a requirement for anyone) then this tag works. Looking at
Germany it appears this is the case.
all allegedly just for the benefit of the “ordinary people” from whom
you suppose to have a distorted view of the situation, so they are not
confused?
It appears it is you who's confused (from '17):
"What is the dividing line between the landuse=railway and the
landuse=railway at the perimeter of the station? Where should we put
railway=station if it is attached to an area?"
Why has the wiki been amended repeatedly since 2015 to remove any
citation regarding inclusion of unrelated signals/points?
If the few (half a dozen?, certainly not "experts") who conceived it
felt it was going to be widely accepted, why was it only discussed in a
hidden, closeted IRC channel?
Why has there been no wide spread adoption, even in Germany, of this
suggestion?
It's a dead proposal
Regards
DaveF
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
