[Tagging] Mapping of Subway Stations

Michael Reichert osm-ml at michreichert.de
Wed Oct 4 22:15:14 UTC 2017


Hi Ilya,

Am 25.09.2017 um 09:46 schrieb Ilya Zverev:
>> Am 2017-09-24 um 10:49 schrieb Ilya Zverev:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Metro_Mapping
>>
>> I don't understand what's the aim of your "proposal". There are almost
>> no new tags. Is it intended as a write-up of what could and should be
>> mapped and tagged and how that should happen?
> 
> The proposal indeed does not introduce any new tags. But it proposes a
> tagging schema that has not been documented anywhere in the wiki. I
> framed it as a proposal to get opinions of other mappers and to make it
> a written standard on metro mapping, so I could link to it people who
> map their subway.

Could you please highlight what's new and what's just "the context"?
This makes it easier to decided what the voters vote on and it will be
clear to future readers what was voted on and what was just explanation.
Yes, it might sound like writing something formal but people will quote
this proposal in future saying "community accepted this proposal".

> Also it would be a handy guide for software authors that want to make
> use of our data. Having looked at the state of metro systems, I can
> safely say that no single app had been using our subway data for
> anything but highlighting ways in route relations.

If you propose a wiki page which should serve as a handy guide for
software authors, you could just write it, mark it as draft and ask for
comments on this mailing list if you are not sure or. If the there are
different opinions, you could summarize them. I still don't see any need
to use proposal process.

> And I think, subway mapping is exactly the case where stop_area_group
> relations are useful. Because not each of 157 metro systems has an
> openly licensed GTFS feed providing these virtual connections. And it is
> not hard to provide these in OSM, just by creating stop_area_group
> relations. You cannot derive these from footways either, because only a
> few cities have that thoroughly drawn stations, and even these are not
> mapped consistently. This task is definitely not solvable by a computer
> programme — believe me, I tried. Had to do a lot of manual fixing
> afterwards.

What about declaring stop_area_group relations as an interim solution
until the platforms of all its member stations are routeable?

> Interchanges are not suggestions, they are clearly defined in the
> proposal and quite prominent on any subway maps. With your arguments you
> can build a case for dismissing stop_area relations, and also highway
> route and waterway relations.

Are we allowed to use these subway maps?

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20171005/fb0f8c91/attachment.sig>


More information about the Tagging mailing list