[Tagging] Was public_transport=platform intended to always be combined with highway=bus_stop?
selfishseahorse at gmail.com
Wed Jul 31 08:35:50 UTC 2019
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  i initiated in April about improving public transport
mapping agreed too.
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. 
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