[Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

dktue email at daniel-korn.de
Fri Aug 14 08:59:11 UTC 2020

Am 14.08.2020 um 10:53 schrieb yvecai:
> On 14.08.20 10:40, dktue wrote:
>>> I would define it as:
>>> lower_station: station that has the lowest elevation (exact 
>>> elevation is not necessary to know, it's obvious)
>>> upper_station: station that has the highest elevation
>>> mid_station: any other station
>> I want to add: At least in Germany, Switzerland and Austria there are 
>> well-established german words which you often find in the name of the 
>> stations themselves:
>> * "Talstation" ("valley station")
>> * "Bergstation" ("mountain station"), sometimes also "Gipfelstation" 
>> ("summit station")
>> * "Mittelstation" ("mid station")
>> There should be a machine-readeably tagging to get this information 
>> that is so often encoded in the name. That's why I'm suggesting this 
>> tagging.
> Then why not valley / mid / mountain as values ? If the mountain 
> station is lower than the mid- one, there is no discussion.
I think the germany word "Talstation" ("valley station") is not flawless 
as a Talstation might not be in the valley but in the middle of the 
mountain. I think in the german language "Talstation" refers to the 
lowest station of an aerialway. That's why I think lower/mid/upper are 
better suited.
> But also, my feeling is that it's more defined by the destination of 
> the stop rather than a property of the aerialway node in question: you 
> expect maybe a restaurant in the 'mountain station', more rarely in 
> the 'valley station', you also expect to put your skis on or start 
> riding your bike in the former, etc ...
> There is more to a 'mountina station' than being up/down.
That true but I think there are different tags to add this information.

More information about the Tagging mailing list