You see Gilles? It's not about to happen anytime soon. (It's not the first time I receive this answer). It would also help if somebody updated the wiki page where the 'new' scheme is explained, to reflect this opinion.
Could somebody fix the validator in JOSM? A node with highway=bus_stop should not cause a warning when assigned a platform role in a route relation. I also fail to see why stop and platform roles are needed in stop_area relations. It's obvious which is which. Jo 2013/12/9 Richard Mann <[email protected]> > highway=bus_stop & railway=tram_stop are well-established and do the basic > job perfectly well > > some people decided they wanted a different system > > the value to the renderers of processing the new system is unclear at > best; so they aren't likely to > > just add the established tags and be done with it > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Eventually has already taken 2 years and might take another 5. I tag all >> my bus stops with highway=bus_stop, I'll replace it on all 40000 of them >> with public_transport=platform/bus=yes at some point in the distant future. >> I've been asking to render it for ages now and I gave up hope. >> I also don't see why I would be double tagging though. >> >> The problem is, of course, that in my route relations I do use the role >> platform, and JOSM's validator doesn't like that. So be it. It's annoying >> when this pops up in other people's sessions though and they start asking >> questions about it. >> >> The icon you see in JOSM, is just an icon. The internal rendering rules >> give precedence to railway=tram_stop or public_transport=platform/tram=yes. >> That's not a problem. >> >> No reason for separating them. >> >> I do separate stops over different nodes when they belong to different >> operators though, because sometimes the zones differ, or the refs, or the >> names. I then combine them into a stop_area relation, together with a node >> public_transport=stop_position/bus=yes (as a node of the highway). I don't >> always create these and I never add them to the route relations. >> >> The route relations are a pain to maintain, no need to make it even more >> complicated. >> >> Polyglot >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2013/12/9 Mike N <[email protected]> >> >>> On 12/9/2013 6:52 AM, Gilles Baumgartner wrote: >>> >>> Is it ok to *add* the legacy tag >>>> highway <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=bus_stop >>>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop> >>>> >>>> to be at the same time compliant with the new tags but still make the >>>> renderer show the bus stop? >>>> >>> >>> I would recommend adding the legacy tag. This is because the public >>> transport tagging scheme is in a long transition period. Eventually the >>> map rendering rules will be modified to include the new scheme. >>> >>> *2. Combined stops, e.g. tram and bus* >>>> >>> >>> I'm not familiar with this problem; hopefully someone else will have a >>> recommendation. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-transit mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-transit mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-transit mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
