[Tagging] Was public_transport=platform intended to always be combined with highway=bus_stop?

Markus selfishseahorse at gmail.com
Wed Jul 31 08:35:50 UTC 2019

Hi Joseph

On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 15:59, Joseph Eisenberg
<joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> I still haven't seen any benefit in adding public_transport=platform
> to highway=bus_stop or highway=platform or railway=platform features,
> and it doesn't look like the =stop_position tag is needed for routers
> either, so all 3 of the main public_transport tags (except perhaps the
> stop_area relation?) are rarely helpful.

I agree, and it seems that most people that took part in this long
discussion [1] i initiated in April about improving public transport
mapping agreed too.

[1]: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/2019-April/002052.html

While highway=bus_stop works in most simpler cases, it doesn't work
very well for bus stations. For example, consider this simplified map
of the postbus station in Bern. [2]

[2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Postautostation_Bern.svg

It consists of seven platforms, numbered 1–7, and a mere pole on the
sidewalk with the number 8. As highway=bus_stop and highway=platform
both use the the highway=* key and thus can't be combined, for every
platform i would need to map a highway=platform and a highway=bus_stop
object. But which one should get the ref=*? Both? And which one should
be added to the route relation? Usually highway=bus_stop is added to
the route relation, but for trains, it is the platform.

A possible solution of this problem were to invent a new tag for
stops, which doesn't use the highway=* or railway=* key and thus can
be combined with highway/railway=platform (e.g. public_transport=stop;
or, alternatively, a new tag for platforms). However, i haven't got
any feedback on that idea, so i don't know whether the community would
accept such a change in tagging.



More information about the Tagging mailing list