[Talk-transit] Tagging of railway station

[fly]

Hey

We already have public_transport=stop_area and the site-relation in use
with stations. For the buildings with several levels we even have
level-relations.

As these areas are sometimes quite complex we won't be able to map them
all in a simple way.

cu fly

On 18.12.2013 21:58, Richard Mann wrote:
> The number of stations is quite small, so people will find a way to deal
> with it. Probably by re-adding nodes until the area advocates give up.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Copro Grammes <coprogrammes at yahoo.fr
> <mailto:coprogrammes at yahoo.fr>> wrote:
> 
>     OK!
>     Just one question: what do you mean saying "Having separate node and
>     area doesn't usually create too many problems" ? Currently, either a
>     node or an area is created to define a railway station, isn't it ?
>     So there is never separate node and area in the same station. Is
>     there something I didn't understand ?
> 
>     Zigeuner
> 
> 
>     Le Mercredi 18 décembre 2013 10h49, Richard Mann
>     <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com
>     <mailto:richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com>> a écrit :
>     The label role would be a solution, but unfortunately it isn't
>     supported by the major renderers (afaik). So for the moment we stick
>     with having the tags on the label node. Since the label is usually
>     fairly obvious, having separate node and area doesn't usually create
>     too many problems. 
> 
>     So the main reason for change would be to fit in with a some mappers
>     desire for everything to be tied up neatly in relations. That's not
>     really a good enough reason. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it.
> 
>     Richard
> 
> 
>     On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Copro Grammes
>     <coprogrammes at yahoo.fr <mailto:coprogrammes at yahoo.fr>> wrote:
> 
>         Thank you for your answers.
> 
>         I was also inclined to add railway=station tag to a node rather
>         than to an area. But some French mappers advocate for the 'area'
>         solution, contrary to the former version of the wiki, and I've
>         begun to hesitate between both the approaches.
>         So I was hoping this debate could be settled, but currently this
>         is clearly not the case... Doesn't this matter interest anybody
>         else ? Or doesn't anybody else have an opinion about this question ?
> 
>         >This problem is not know (see place=*). We even already have an
>         solution: role "label".
>         The role "label" could be interesting, but how can we use it ?
>         Did you mean we could create a label relation [1] ? Or did you
>         mean we should add a node with the role "label" to the stop_area
>         relation which would be tagged railway=station (but the
>         stop_area could also contain a bus station, a subway station,
>         etc.) ?
> 
>         >For new created objects I only use the new scheme but I do not
>         delete
>         the older tags if already tagged but only add the new ones.
>         So I think it means you add the "public_transport=station" tag
>         to the same node/area which was already tagged "railway=station"
>         (as Roland did), doesn'it ?
> 
>         Cheers,
>         Zigeuner
> 
>         [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label
> 
>