[Tagging] Additions to public_transport scheme

Colin Smale colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Thu Jul 7 06:28:35 UTC 2016

On 2016-07-07 08:15, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> On 07/07/2016 08:04 AM, Tijmen Stam wrote: 
>> It's the place the stop is _in_.
> We usually resolve such issues by looking at the surrounding
> administrative area polygons. You will see that, for example, we have
> long since stopped tagging a village with
> "is_in=CountyA,StateB,CountryC" because the geocoder can easily
> determine this information from the admin boundaries. The same can be
> done for public transport stops.

Depends on the country... the UK does not have well-defined boundaries
for settlements unless they happen to coincide with a parish council
boundary. In very many ways the UK is far less organised and structured
than most European countries. The results from Nominatim for an
arbitrary location in the UK are usually just about recognisable, but in
many cases differ widely from what a "local resident" would
instinctively expect. 

> Or are you saying that the public transport company might use a
> different name for the administrative entity than can be deduced from
> the admin boundary?

This can easily be the case, as the transport company might use the
colloquial name for a location. Admin boundaries can be funny sometimes,
dividing a settlement into parts which the man in the street doesn't

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160707/9ede8b2c/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list