[Talk-GB] Things that aren't stations tagged railway=station

Andy Allan gravitystorm at gmail.com
Tue Apr 19 09:21:17 BST 2011

Hi All,

In making my recent transport map[1] I've found there's a (relatively)
large number of nodes in the UK tagged railway=station, when they
aren't stations (and often aren't any railways there, either). I'm
proposing that we don't tag former, disused or fictional stations in a
way that confuses mainstream users of OSM, in the same way we don't
tag proposed motorways as highway=motorway.

I realise that there are additional tags to try to indicate that they
don't exist (such as disused=yes) but I don't think this is a
particularly useful approach, given the near infinite numbers of extra
tags that could be thought up for fictional, planned,
was-planned-not-built-not-planned-any-more etc stations. Even the wiki
page for disused=yes suggests it's a bad idea[2], and that some other
"backwards-compatible" approach would be better. We have a
backwards-compatible approach for the disused and abandoned railway
lines already.

Would there be objections to changing the situation with UK railway
stations to bring it into line with highways/railway lines, e.g.
railway=disused, disused=station , or e.g. railway=abandoned,
abandoned=station? It's such a niche interest (well, seemingly much
less niche in the UK than elsewhere :-) ) that I don't think it helps
to tag things in their current scheme. I don't think this is
particularly controversial (my suggestions mirror the approach for
both highways and railway lines already), I've discussed it already
with a handful of people who have used the old approach, but I thought
it best to air it here too.


[1] http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2011/04/11/transport-map/
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list