[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

Dave F davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com
Fri Mar 20 14:15:05 UTC 2020

On 11/03/2020 12:07, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> I notice that they also refer to adding bus=yes etc to platforms
> representing bus stops, which was not part of the PTv2 proposal, but I guess
> tries to deal with one of the issues that led people to prefer
> highway=bus_stop.
> Yes, that is a rather silly thing that has been added, since it was
> noticed after the proposal that if you removed highway=bus_stop and
> only had public_transport=platform, then you would have no way to know
> it was a bus stop rather than a train platform.
> So now some mappers advocate adding a second tag bus=yes, originally
> only proposed for stop positions. But if the originally, more common
> tag highway=bus_stop is already used, there is no need to add bus=yes.

This shows, once again, how PTv2 just induces confusion & so leads to 
errors in the OSM database.

PTv2 was, naively, designed as a replacement for existing transit tags. 
They were not designed to be used in conjunction with each other. so 
Joseph's last sentence is irrelevant & incorrect.

PTv2 was a cock-up & needs to be rescinded.


More information about the Tagging mailing list