[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Thu Mar 12 08:11:50 UTC 2020

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:20 AM Jarek PiĆ³rkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca>

> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 23:09, Joseph Eisenberg
> <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  In inclement weather, passengers may well be found waiting in
> > the transit shelter 8 metres to west, and the tram will stop for them
> > if they are waiting in the shelter. It might also stop if you are
> > waiting a little bit beyond the shelter
> >
> > In this case it sounds like the tram operators are allowed to stop in
> > several different places.
> >
> > I would pick the place where the tram normally stops: either at the
> > sign or the location of the shelter, depending on the standard
> > practice in the local area. Either way, tram riders will be directed
> > to the correct location by routing apps: an 8 meter difference is not
> > significant.
> But why pick one and not the other? Only for the sake of having one
> point rather than two in a database? Especially in this case where
> they can be fairly reasonably described as "stop position" (the sign)
> and "waiting area" (the shelter).

platform=stop_position is a node that is part of the way. As far as I'm
concerned, they are not super important. What you call stop position (the
sign) in the above paragraph seems to be what corresponds to
highway=bus_stop, if it were a bus stop. That's the node, detached from the
way that I would map as railway=tram_stop for representing the stop in the
route relations, with all its details.. Of course, when you only have
aerial imagery, it may be difficult to know that exact position. If there
is a shelter I would put this node near to it, if there is nothing, I would
place that node somewhere in the middle of a typical tram's length.

If there is only a sidewalk, we would be done. If there is an actual
platform, I would add a way or a closed_way with railway=platform, and
possibly its height, tactile_paving and wheelchair. No name, no other
details, they are on the node that represents the stop.

If there is a shelter, I would map it with a closed_way; amenity=shelter,

> > >  Berlin mapping of streetside tram stops like
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389400777
> >
> > I have not visited that location in person, and the aerial imagery is
> > not high enough resolution to see if there is a separate platform, so
> > it is hard for me to say.
> >
> > The "gold standard" is survey: visiting the stop in location (and
> > riding the tram perhaps)
> >
> > Do you know if the "platform" here is separate from the sidewalk in
> > some way? It should either be a different height, or a different
> > surface, or at least marked with a painted / thermoplastic line.
> > Otherwise the length of this "platform" way would be arbitrary: why
> > not include the whole block?
> In this particular case, there is not a platform that can be
> distinguished - it's a curbside stop. The length of the "platform" way
> appears to roughly match the length of the vehicles and thus the area
> where the vehicles can be boarded (all-door boarding is in effect).
> Berlin doesn't have many curbside stops but where they do exist, this
> seems to be the prevailing local tagging.
> --Jarek
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200312/e83ac8ee/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list