[Tagging] railway=station areas
Dave F
davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com
Tue Oct 13 14:56:06 UTC 2020
On 11/10/2020 08:16, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Are you mapping train stations as areas? From reading your replies
> here the impression I get is you are advocating for not extending the
> representation from a node to an area, right? I do not understand why
> you are fighting so hard to make a tag useless/superfluous (same
> meaning as public_transport=station) which you do not even use in this
> way, and without offering an alternative,
1. I'm not. I amended a graphic to correspond with the wiki text:"
places where customers can access railway services or where goods are
loaded and unloaded.". Nothing about signals/points half a mile away.
It's you who's "fighting so hard " against the definition.
2. PT tags have no influence on railway=*.
3. Alternative: landuse=railway., of which railway=station is a subset.
if you require signals/points to be within a polygon (it's still unclear
why this is a requirement for anyone) then this tag works. Looking at
Germany it appears this is the case.
> all allegedly just for the benefit of the “ordinary people” from whom
> you suppose to have a distorted view of the situation, so they are not
> confused?
It appears it is you who's confused (from '17):
"What is the dividing line between the landuse=railway and the
landuse=railway at the perimeter of the station? Where should we put
railway=station if it is attached to an area?"
Why has the wiki been amended repeatedly since 2015 to remove any
citation regarding inclusion of unrelated signals/points?
If the few (half a dozen?, certainly not "experts") who conceived it
felt it was going to be widely accepted, why was it only discussed in a
hidden, closeted IRC channel?
Why has there been no wide spread adoption, even in Germany, of this
suggestion?
It's a dead proposal
Regards
DaveF
More information about the Tagging
mailing list