[Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

Tijmen Stam mailinglists at iivq.net
Wed May 8 19:45:32 UTC 2019

On 28-04-19 16:02, Markus wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 14:30, Snusmumriken
> <snusmumriken.mapper at runbox.com> wrote:
>> Somehow I think that it is too late to define one schema that would
>> rule the world. Too much has already been mapped for it to be redone.
>> But I might be wrong. I also share your observation that PTv2 is way
>> too complex.
> In my opinion, it's never too late for improvements. :) And if we go
> for the first solution ("improved PTv1"), not much retagging were
> required as nearly all stops, stations and platforms use the PTv1 tags
> for rendering anyway.
>> For what it is worth I might point you to have a look at how things are
>> mapped in Stockholm metropolitan region. It is our version of a
>> simplified PTv2. Unfortunately there isn't any English language
>> definition of it. But I hope an example is self explanatory enough
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2376126

This seems like normal PTv1 except you have routes in both ways, which 
very easily could be brought up to PTv2 standards:

If you would give the stop nodes the "platform" node instead of "stop" 
and public_transport=platform (and move all the stops to the top of the 
ways), you would confirm to PTv2 (off course you would also have to 
change the version from 1 to 2).

Note that nowhere in the PTv2 wiki it says it is mandatory to have both 
a stop and a platform! Either one is ok (although I strongly prefer to 
have both).


More information about the Talk-transit mailing list