[Talk-transit] New 'Transit' page and proposed Stop Place model

Frankie Roberto frankie at frankieroberto.com
Thu Aug 6 14:07:39 BST 2009

On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Peter Miller <peter.miller at itoworld.com>wrote:

> That was my feeling as well. The complexity of Trams will be easier to
> explain in its own article. The name of the article matters less than the
> content given that it can be moved. Lets start writing the articles and then
> we can see what feel right and ensure that all the titles are consistent. If
> we have Trams, then we should have Buses and Trains etc. Busways doesn't
> make sense so I suggest Trams is right actually.

Cool. I'll start this now.

> You will also notice that I am also plugging a proposal I am
>> developing for a new consistent Stop Place model ( based on Oxoma's
>> proposal) which you can read about here:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:PeterIto/Stop_Place
> I'm getting a little confused by having so many separate proposals on so
> many different pages (many of which are user pages). I'd suggest:
> a) developing these schemes within the public namespace, so as to encourage
> more collaboration/discussion.
> I totally agree. I was developing it in my name-space out of politeness
> with the intention of moving it to the main space if the community requested
> it. I suggest we work to get one article that works for us and then we make
> it clear that the other proposals are now redundant (useful and great that
> they were produced, but not a suitable reference for current tagging). I
> will move it later today until I hear any objections. Feel free to edit away
> if you like in the mean time.


b) splitting the pages down into smaller components - eg railways, bus
> stops, train services, train stations, etc. Whilst it's good to have an
> overall conceptual model, I think most mappers will be more interested in
> understanding how to tag at a feature level.
> Umm.. I  think it is important to have a page for the conceptual model and
> then when we are happy with it, we introduce it into the other articles in
> the context of that transport mode. A description of a Stop Place for a
> drag-lift will be pretty different from that of an airport, but I am keen
> that there is a consistency across modes from a programming and tagging
> perspective.
> I think I more-or-less agree. I'm mainly just keen that we keep the
discussion embedded in the context of actual usage (with plenty of real-life
examples) rather than being too abstract.

> I think we should also remove the redirect from
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:public_transport and turn that into
> a standard Key page (with the KeyDescription infobox) documenting existing
> and proposed usage of the key.  Likewise, it'd be useful to have the
> relevant tag and key pages for all the other tags and keys that are in use
> or proposed.
> It is certainly not appropriate for it to redirect to a user page. For now
> I have redirected it to the Transit article until someone fancies adding
> some content, however....  I am not clear if we even want a key of that
> title, should we not standarise on Transit rather than public transport. The
> proposed use of the tag is something I would prefer to call stop_place
> anyway.

I agree that whether we need the key or not is unclear. However, since
there's at least some usages of it currently, I think it's worth documenting
what the existing practice is at least (same for other tags with significant

This reminds me - I think it'd be worth encouraging people here to share
links to OSM for public transport stops/routes/etc that they've mapped, for
feedback and discussion. I did this a while back on the discussion page for
the unified_stoparea proposal (see

In this spirit, here's what I've mostly done so far:

Oxford Road train station (
 - mapped the platforms as areas (railway=platform, role=platform)
 - mapped all the tracks, and the stopping points (role=halt) with one of
them marked as the 'main' one with railway=station and a name tag.
- station building outline (building=yes, no role)
- footbridge and steps (not part of the relation - wasn't sure whether they
should be?)

Have started to map the tram system in Manchester as two separate tracks (
http://osm.org/go/evgo1FaS--) though this is complicated by the sharing of
ways with the highway, and the current part-closure of the system for track

Mapping UK tram system routes as relations (see

Mapping UK 'minor railway' routes as relations (see

Would welcome comments on any of those - and would love to see which bits of
the map other people are working on!


Frankie Roberto
Experience Designer, Rattle
0114 2706977
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/attachments/20090806/d9aa46aa/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-transit mailing list