[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