Talk:Proposed features/Stop Area
Review (8 Aug 2009)
I've finally had time to do a proper review of this proposal. Firstly - thanks for being so comprehensive, and for referencing so many of the alternative schemes.
Overall, I think one of the biggest changes I'd suggest is not to propose a single tag for the accesses (public_transport=access and stopping paces (public_transport=stopping_place). Firstly, because I don't think these names will be intuitive to mappers, and secondly because it'd involve a whole lot of migration and change of the existing practices. Instead, I think it'd be better to use the established tags, and, if necessary, add a relevant role to the relation (eg role=access. This, I think, would fit better with the established OSM practices, and, so long as we're consistent, (eg highway=bus_stop always being an access), wouldn't cause any ambiguities.
Secondly, I think the public_transport=stop_place would be a bad tag for the relation - it doesn't feel intuitive to me. Instead, I think it'd be better to follow the existing practice of using the type=site tag, and then adding an addition site=* tag (which could be site=stop_area (as per unified stoparea), site=stop_place (following your proposal), or something else. (I think I'd suggest site=transport_stop). Alternatively, the tag could differ based on mode - eg using site=bus_stop for simple bus stops, site=bus_station for bigger bus stations, site=railway_station for railway stations, site=tram_stop for tram stops, site=airport for airports, and so on. Where stops are multi-modal, you would either pick the primary type of stop (eg if it's a big railway station with a couple of bus stops outside, use site=railway_station) or would use a more generic tag, such as site=public_transport_interchange
Hope this makes sense. Cheers. Frankie Roberto 10:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Some great ideas in there which will help integrate the modeling better into other OpenStreetMap features. I have implemented most of the above ideas into the article itself and added questions where I see unanswered issues. On principle can we keep the main body of text in the main article to just describe the proposed solution with any comments, questions or observations either being in italics and signed in the article on on this page (or on talk-transit). PeterIto 07:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
It has been proposed that this page is merged with Public Transport. I disagree at present. It might indeed be appropriate if / when this proposal is accepted to merge the pages, but currently this is just one of a number of proposals and has not been agreed. So... the Public transport page should continue to represent agreed current practice and not include this information. Before voting we need to ensure that we have the German community on board (who have been doing a lot of public transport work recently) and also the main public transport rendering engines. I suggest that we will need an implementation plan with work, such as making modifications to the rendering engines, tag conversion (including a period of dual-tagging), NaPTAN tag conversion etc. PeterIto 17:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Peter. I agree. By suggesting the merge, what I really meant was that we should start to pull out some of the suggestions from this proposal (and others) onto Public transport and relevant pages, and link to here from there. And yes, I'm really keen that we can work with the German community to establish something that works for everyone (as there have already been several disjointed efforts, as you know). Frankie Roberto 20:47, 9 August 2009 (UTC) P.S what do you make of my comments above?
- Ok, so that is not strictly a merge - I suggest we remove the banner for now. Let's aim to get all the public transport pages into shape in the next few days and then request a discussion on Stop Places on the English and German lists before doing a formal vote on Stop Place. When we are done with that we can merge the conclusions into the rest of the wiki as appropriate. PeterIto 06:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Cable Cars etc (Aerialways)
There are tags used for these: aerialway=cable_car etc. There is also an aerialway node aerialway=station which currently represents both the car stopping place and the passenger waiting place. See for example: Algana where the cable car (unusually) has an intermediate station, and Davos Schiferbahn a fairly typical gondola with an intermediate station. Incidentally, the top station of this lift the Weissfluhjoch is a complex interchange, and is partially represented on OSM. With French cadastral data it is increasingly likely that large cable car and gondola stations might be represented in some detail. There are various points about these which I presume are covered by the various transport models: cable cars which are boarded from both sides, position of the turnstile gate, position of entrance and exit of lift stations. I could probably find some of these from my traces of last winter to build a suitable example. SK53 20:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Peter. I've started using railway=stop for the stopping points. Your proposal suggests railway=stopping_point (I forgot this), but I think stop works better as it matches the stop role used on the routes and stop areas. Frankie Roberto 10:41, 12 September 2009 (UTC)