[Tagging] Still RFC — Drop stop positions and platforms

[Selfish Seahorse]

> And if a tag is needed, stop vs stop_position would surely cause confusion!

If we would map a public_transport=stop node regardless of whether
there's a platform or not and if only public_transport=stop nodes
would be added to route relations then public_transport=stop_position
wouldn't be needed anymore (because for long platform, there is the
information where the vehicle stops) and there would be no confusion.

> As has been noted elsewhere, public_transport=platform was probably not an ideal word choice, perhaps wait_area or some such would have been better, but it is what it is.

It is a scheme that has been around for seven years but hasn't been
adopted widely, which means that something isn't optimal with it.
Seven years is a very long time!

In my opinion, it's never too late to look for alternatives.


On 30 March 2018 at 08:56, Johnparis <okosm at johnfreed.com> wrote:
> I don't think a tag is needed for "wild" platforms. As already noted,
> public_transport=platform applies to nodes already. And shelter=yes/no or
> bench=yes/no can be added if that's the infrastructure Christian means. (Not
> clear to me what exactly a "wild" platform is.)
>
> And if a tag is needed, stop vs stop_position would surely cause confusion!
>
> As has been noted elsewhere, public_transport=platform was probably not an
> ideal word choice, perhaps wait_area or some such would have been better,
> but it is what it is.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 8:45 AM, Selfish Seahorse
> <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > If this is a problem, because the tag should ideally discrimnate built
>> > structure features, then either
>> >
>> > a) find a new tag for wild platforms
>>
>> Maybe public_transport=stop?
>>
>>
>> On 29 March 2018 at 16:30, "Christian Müller" <cmue81 at gmx.de> wrote:
>> > Mapping public transport in detail was in part started to aid impaired
>> > people and people with diminished mobility.  The stop_position is an
>> > attempt
>> > to tell for large/long platforms at which subarea of the platform you
>> > can
>> > expect a public service vehicle to have an entrance (regardless of its
>> > length, that may change with time of day or when the schedule of the
>> > company
>> > is overhauled).
>> >
>> > The platform itself will not give you any clues which position to route
>> > a
>> > user to so that him/her readjusting position on that platform is minimal
>> > once the vehicle arrived and is ready for boarding.
>> >
>> > If the platform exists, mapping it is more important than the
>> > stop_position,
>> > but the latter gives additional info _especially_ for lengthy or large
>> > platforms.
>> >
>> > -----
>> >
>> > There have been complaints about added pseudo-platforms in the data.
>> > This
>> > situation stems from the fact, that platforms are missing on ground (for
>> > lack of money, political decisions or because the halt is seen as a
>> > temporary one).  _Nevertheless_, public transport users _do_ and _have_
>> > to
>> > use parts of the area around the PT-pole as a platform.  In this case
>> > the
>> > tag is not used to map a built structure, but how the space is
>> > effectively
>> > used on ground.  If this is a problem, because the tag should ideally
>> > discrimnate built structure features, then either
>> >
>> > a) find a new tag for wild platforms
>> > b) allow the platform tag on nodes and use a single node only where a
>> > built
>> > platform structure does not exist
>> >
>> > may be an solution.
>> >
>> >
>> > Greetings
>> > cmuelle8
>> >
>> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. März 2018 um 13:36 Uhr
>> > Von: Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>
>> > An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>> > <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> > Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Still RFC — Drop stop positions and platforms
>> > That's what I would like to see happen. Last year I created a wiki page
>> > about it (with screenshots):
>> >
>> >
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/PT_Assistant/Mapping_Public_Transport_with_JOSM#Downloading_data
>> >
>> > Polyglot
>> >
>> > 2018-03-29 13:09 GMT+02:00 Selfish Seahorse <selfishseahorse at gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >> > Otherwise, public_transport=stop_position could be abandoned, which
>> >> > would make PTv2 tagging a lot easier and more time-efficient.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Tagging mailing list
>> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>