[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

Michael Reichert osm-ml at michreichert.de
Fri Oct 6 11:00:48 UTC 2017

Hi Martin,

Am 2017-10-06 um 09:51 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> what I forgot to conclude: as the values are mostly new, and it’s not an access restriction, I’d use a different key for this, rather than bus you could use something like route:scope or route:type etc.

Some people (including myself) started using service=* for train routes
about two to three years ago. The service=* tag was part of the Oxomoa
Schema. Why not using this tag with different values for bus routes?

Best regards


Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
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: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20171006/119261c2/attachment.sig>

More information about the Tagging mailing list