Contents 1 Opinion 1.1 Several railway lines going into a large railway station 2 Voting in 2007 2.1 binding entrances to the station 2.2 Why not to an area? 2.3 Binding - make the subway_entrance a node in the station 2.4 Also underground pedestrian walkthrough?

Opinion

• I believe this is specifically proposed as railway=subway_entrance ? I support this proposal. There has been comment that such things "clutter up the map". I'd respond that this is a rendering issue, not a data entry issue. If something is not tagged, nothing can be done with it and the data collection opportunity is lost. If something is tagged, a general renderer can simply ignore it, or only show it at detailed zoom levels. MikeCollinson 02:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• This probably probably needs expanding to cover access to pedestrian routes that are not obvious from the maps. The main reason for NEEDING to include them is where pedestrians can cross busy roads but we probably need to come up with a standard tagging method that handles not only subway entrances, but any route where a pedestrian can gain access to overpasses, underpasses, and other pedestrian only areas which also have roads crossing them. I'm thinking of the likes of Prague where there are under ground shopping ares, that may also have a metro station at one end? Lester Caine 10:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• I support this proposal. Should we be able to tag the Entrance with user categories 'foot=yes', 'bicycle=yes' and state that that the default is for 'foot=yes'? Also, the current model isn't really able to distinguish which side of a busy road an entrance is on which is something that will need to be sorted out separately. Peter Miller 9:23am 11 June 2007

The access and default suggestions makes sense. Having an explicit default(s) for other existing tags would be good practise. MikeCollinson 10:38, 16 June 2007 (BST)

Would not the location be obvious from where the tag was placed? I'm always careful to place things like bus stops, post boxes, shops on the correct side of a previously entered highway way. MikeCollinson 10:38, 16 June 2007 (BST)

I agree with Ewmjc; unless the entrance is in the center of the road (which I would say is fairly unlikely), which side of the road should be obvious. --Hawke 20:40, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Sorry to disappoint you, but that is fairly common in e.g. Berlin. Most of the old stations are build with one platform between two tracks and the entrance up into a traffic island in the middle of the street. Henry Loenwind 18:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

• And, hey, would the original proposer like to open voting now? This will be a very useful addition to me if accepted! MikeCollinson 10:38, 16 June 2007 (BST)

• And what about subways that serve buses? Seattle's "subway" was an electric bus guideway (until just recently - it's currently being refitted to add light rail). --Cohort 22:06, 14 September 2007 (BST)

• And what about subways entrance accessibility? It could be useful to indicate which entrances of a station have lift for people with wheelchair. --Livewire74 11:44, 5 October 2007 (CST)

FWIW, a proposed tag is here: Proposed_features/wheelchair. --Colin Marquardt 00:00, 8 October 2007 (BST)

See also Proposed_features/lifts --Lulu-Ann 15:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Several railway lines going into a large railway station

Another related problem presents itself when you have several railway lines going into a large railway station. Baker Street is a good example. For rendering reasons I've just created one railway=station node, and positioned this in the best place, such that the circle line goes through in roughly the right place, and somebody looking at map will hopefully guess that the main station entrances (at street level actually, not particuarly subway) are onto Baker St and Marylebone Rd.

The station platforms are not necessarily at that one spot of course, which means there is some fiction involved in drawing the railway=rail ways through the railway=station node. Now Jubilee line and Bakerloo line are deep underground anyway, so it's difficult to know where exactly the platform is, and map users generally dont care anyway. The circle line is in roughly the right place (maybe slightly further south, since i think it runs under Marlyebone Rd actually)

BUT the metropolitan line platform is visible in Yahoo imagery, and is about 50-100 meters further north from the location of the railway=station node. This means the southward bend in the met line track, is ficticious. In fact the track continues parallel to Allsop place, and merges into the circle line to the East.

I figured I would map it like that for now. We don't really want two different Baker Street nodes (baring in mind that many/most map usage doesn't involve zooming in this much anway), so I just left a node with a note on the met line platform. Something to be fixed by coming up with some new node/relation tagging. On the other hand, trying to map the exact locations of platforms and connecting pedestrian tunnels, is maybe a slipperly slope to avoid.

-- Harry Wood 13:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

How about we get rid of railway=station concept. Instead, tag nodes or areas as ticket halls, and have those appear on maps. In underground stations, I would expect these nodes or areas to be disconnected from railway=rail lines. We would then use relations to associate these with the lines and the nodes representing the position of the platform on the line. Some consideration would be needed for stations with several ticket halls (like Elephant and Castle). Possibly we would designate one of the ticket hall nodes as the primary one for use at mid-zooms. Morwen 13:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

is there something real coming up with relations, and, if yes, where could i find more on that? --Osm6150856065 12:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The relation name proposed is relation type=site, site=stop_area. see stop_area.--Lulu-Ann 12:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

How to tie the subway entrances to the actual subway stations? What avout highway=footway+tunnel=yes? Access tags according to the correct access restrictions of corse. --Skippern 00:38, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Voting in 2007

Voting is opened as of September 14th 2007, last vote cast in 8 nov 2007: these people voted for approval: Ivansanchez Colin Marquardt Hawke Cohort Peter James Andrewpmk MikeCollinsonDido lets talk about it EsbenDamgaard Nevermind

binding entrances to the station

IMO the most logical way is to draw the footways leading to the underground platforms. Anything less than that is just a temporary construct. Alv 10:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

That's exactly what we need the levels proposal for. Lulu-Ann

Why not to an area?

Often subway entrance is a separate building. --Varnav 18:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea, you have to thing what will happen to renders and if they expect a node Erik Johansson 11:04, 14 October 2011 (BST)

Binding - make the subway_entrance a node in the station

By making the subway entrance a node in the larger station, it is clear which station this entrance belongs to. You can then use the name to specify the name of the entrance - "D3" or "Pedder Street". For Example: http://osm.org/go/41dN@q35I-- . --Jharvey 02:56, 9 May 2011 (BST)

Subway stations don't feel like buildings to me, they are not above ground. This is a hard question imho. I think  112427969 is clearly wrongly tagged, but I like the effect. Erik Johansson 11:04, 14 October 2011 (BST)

Also underground pedestrian walkthrough?

There are two types of subway stations under roads:

• Those where entrances are on both sides of the road and the tracks are in the middle under the road, so you can not avoid crossing the street by walking underground
• Those where entrances are on both sides of the road and the platform is in the middle, so you can cross the street by going underground.

For estimating the safetiness of pedestrian routes, it is needed to know wether you can use the subway as an alternative crossing. Are there any proposals how to map the difference? Or do we have to map the footway underground? Lulu-Ann

Yes map them as footways no need to complicate things Erik Johansson 11:04, 14 October 2011 (BST)