railway=station areas

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
Apologies for breaking the thread, but I was unable to connect to
Tagging & missed the initial message in my email client.

I'm the user in disagreement. (Although reading the current
railway=station wiki page I'm not convinced there's an genuine
alternative belief).

I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of
railway=stations are mapped as nodes:
      Node    Way     Relation
IT   2878    400     15
DE   4388    39      45
FR   2553    646     14
JP   9063    5       11
US   4140    174     8

I edited a copy of the diagram (A-simple-station.svg) of a station
layout, primarily to remove any references to PTv2 tags, a completely
independent, duplicating tagging schema, irrelevant to anything to do
with the railway=station tag. I also amended the area indicating what
roughly constitutes a 'railway station' according to the wiki. This is
the only page I uploaded the image to. (It's not complete - the creation
of the PNG image removes the angled text I used)

It appears that in 2015 a user took it upon himself to wholesale rewrite
the wiki page, based on discussions in OpenRailwayMap IRC, a small
clique group that keeps no record of any conclusions. If anyone knows if
discussions took place on a major, wider reaching forum, please indicate
them.

Tagging objects should be based on the understanding of what the general
consumer of OSM accept it to be, not just a small group of "rail
enthusiasts" from Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_station -

"It generally consists of at least one track-side platform and a station
building providing such ancillary services as ticket sales, waiting
rooms and baggage/freight service."

@
If you went up to a commuter waiting on the platform & asked 'what
constitutes a railway station' they would give close to the description
above. I *very* much doubt they'd also turn, point & say 'Oh, & also
that one signal. about about 1 km down the track'. Landuse=railway
should be used for railway areas that far away from the station.

Further comments inline:

On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 at 18:42, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

 > This was also discussed in the wiki:
 >
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:railway%3Dstation#Station_an_area_.3F

That makes no mention of a station's extent.

 > And it is what we do around here locally.

As I've shown, that's not the case, & anyway, OSM is global, not local.

 > It is also what the definition of railway=stations says, the tag
defines "A railway station".

See above at @.

 > A fellow editor now insists that this tag should be used on the same area
 > as defined for public_transport=station, i.e. the part of the train
station
 > that is accessible by passengers (platforms and buildings near the
 > platforms).

 From the wiki "Railway stations are places where customers can access
railway services ". Signals/points are not relevant to customers.

On Wed, 7 Oct 2020  Andrew Harvey wrote:

 >the railway is from the rail network/infrastructure point of view and
public
transit from the passenger point of view.

This seems to be a common misunderstanding by those advocating PTv2.
Railway=station is the original tag for all stations, including
passenger. Introducing a disparate schema at a later date, does not
change the meaning of the original tag.

 > In practice many are mapped as the same area, but that's usually only
because unless you're a train operator it can be hard to actually survey
where the station starts and ends from the train network point of view.

No, it's because the public area is what most people consider to be a
'station'. (& most are mapped as nodes)

Cheers
DaveF



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Andrew Harvey-3


On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 at 09:35, Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apologies for breaking the thread, but I was unable to connect to
Tagging & missed the initial message in my email client.

I'm the user in disagreement. (Although reading the current
railway=station wiki page I'm not convinced there's an genuine
alternative belief).

I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of
railway=stations are mapped as nodes:
      Node    Way     Relation
IT   2878    400     15
DE   4388    39      45
FR   2553    646     14
JP   9063    5       11
US   4140    174     8

I don't think that makes the point moot since nodes are just a quick first pass way to map a station, eventually they should all be upgraded to areas. The same way you can map a building as a node as a first pass, a footprint area is always better.

I edited a copy of the diagram (A-simple-station.svg) of a station
layout, primarily to remove any references to PTv2 tags, a completely
independent, duplicating tagging schema, irrelevant to anything to do
with the railway=station tag. I also amended the area indicating what
roughly constitutes a 'railway station' according to the wiki. This is
the only page I uploaded the image to. (It's not complete - the creation
of the PNG image removes the angled text I used)

It appears that in 2015 a user took it upon himself to wholesale rewrite
the wiki page, based on discussions in OpenRailwayMap IRC, a small
clique group that keeps no record of any conclusions. If anyone knows if
discussions took place on a major, wider reaching forum, please indicate
them.

Tagging objects should be based on the understanding of what the general
consumer of OSM accept it to be, not just a small group of "rail
enthusiasts" from Germany.

OSM should as much as possible try to remain agnostic towards a specific audience or use, we should strive to both be accurate and usable for both train drivers and public transport passengers. This is not just a matter for rail enthusiasts from Germany.
 
 >the railway is from the rail network/infrastructure point of view and
public
transit from the passenger point of view.

This seems to be a common misunderstanding by those advocating PTv2.

I'm not advocating PTv2, for a long time it just seemed like duplication of tags and a waste but if the ability to separate out the rail infrastructure from passenger viewpoint can be done with the tagging schema then that's maybe one advantage.
 
Railway=station is the original tag for all stations, including
passenger. Introducing a disparate schema at a later date, does not
change the meaning of the original tag.

 > In practice many are mapped as the same area, but that's usually only
because unless you're a train operator it can be hard to actually survey
where the station starts and ends from the train network point of view.

No, it's because the public area is what most people consider to be a
'station'. (& most are mapped as nodes)

Maybe a solution is to keep railway=station and public_transport=station both defined as the passenger view, but use a new tag for rail infrastructure so you can still correctly map the station for train drivers. The downside is that's an extra tagging schema to make things even more complicated.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

stevea
There are times and places when / where "keeping plural tagging schemes" is a smarter method to interpret OSM's data.  (Many, in fact).  Saying "this how we should map" (being 'prescriptive') is not the same as wishful thinking.  Being 'descriptive' and saying "this is how we do map" (as we quote taginfo) is (rather) simply looking at existing data in a particular way.

We're smart.  We're people.  Let's stay smart and be smart.  Tagging evolves, tagging has legacies.  We must live with this seeming dichotomy and manage it simultaneously.  Mechanical consumers of OSM's data do get smarter, too.  (Though I don't think the machine learning is anywhere near sentient!)

These (railway stations) are nodes, these are polygons.  These have many methods of interpreting them, so interpret them.  We might (I think we do) improve them as they evolve.  There are good methods for these to evolve, here's the good news:  this happens, as co-operation and consensus work.  Ask yourself:  how many simultaneous (on the planet) "methods" must I imagine these things in the real world today (highways, railways, bike routes, PT routes, boundaries...) in OSM?  Two?  Four?  Six?  Eight?  It's more than one, for sure, and that's OK.  That's OSM.  We have newer data and methods and older data and methods simultaneously, it does get better.  There are seldom magic bullets, it often takes work for these things to evolve.  Yet, they do.  Work it out, we can.

SteveA

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list


sent from a phone

On 10. Oct 2020, at 00:35, Dave F <[hidden email]>

I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of railway=stations are mapped as nodes:
     Node    Way     Relation
IT   2878    400     15
DE   4388    39      45
FR   2553    646     14
JP   9063    5       11
US   4140    174     8


still it seems you found it important enough to engage in an edit war on the wiki and tell me I would have to discuss in order to keep the definition, not you who wants to change it.



I also amended the area indicating what roughly constitutes a 'railway station' according to the wiki.


according to the wiki, a railway station is a railway station, your edit made a part of a railway station the area for railway=station



Tagging objects should be based on the understanding of what the general consumer of OSM accept it to be, not just a small group of "rail enthusiasts" from Germany.


tagging concepts should accommodate both, the general mappers and the experts. Data consumers will have to find a way to make their own sense of the map data, naturally the mappers will try to help them, but it is not the consumers who rule tagging, it’s the mappers.



@
If you went up to a commuter waiting on the platform & asked 'what constitutes a railway station' they would give close to the description above.


just try it. Go to a train station and ask the commuters if they believe that the train on the sidetrack without a platform (waiting to be serviced or restructured or to depart later etc.) is out of the train station or inside. Or the technical station buildings where passengers aren’t admitted.

Do you believe these tracks are outside the station, or do you believe they aren’t but others might think they are, so the best would be to make the OpenStreetMap station as small as we think that they think it is, so nobody is unnecessarily confused?


I *very* much doubt they'd also turn, point & say 'Oh, & also that one signal. about about 1 km down the track'.


I admit I don’t know about signals, but for switches it seems pretty easy: there are tracks coming from somewhere, and at some point, where I would suspect begins the station, these tracks bifurcate and become more.



Landuse=railway should be used for railway areas that far away from the station.


+1, could be used, I’d even say, from far away until very very close, up to the limit of the station area.


On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 at 18:42, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

> This was also discussed in the wiki:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:railway%3Dstation#Station_an_area_.3F

That makes no mention of a station's extent.



You should not map the building as railway=station, because railway=station as an area is seen as the area of the railway station (how obvious ;-) ), which is often from the entrance signal or at least from the first switch/point (AE/BE...) of each direction. --rayquaza (talk) 12:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)



> And it is what we do around here locally.

As I've shown, that's not the case, & anyway, OSM is global, not local.


you have not shown what kind of areas are mapped in OpenStreetMap, what you have shown is that there are more nodes than ways. 



> It is also what the definition of railway=stations says, the tag defines "A railway station".

See above at @.


that’s a citation from wikipedia, and very selective as well, and it doesn’t say what isn’t in or out the station, it says what is the typical minimum you can find at a station 


Cheers Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3
On 10/10/2020 00:34, Andrew Harvey wrote:


I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of
railway=stations are mapped as nodes:
 

I don't think that makes the point moot since nodes are just a quick first pass way to map a station,

railway=station is one of the earliest tags. Given the age of the project, I'm pretty sure we're beyond 'quick first pass'. especially in established countries.

eventually they should all be upgraded to areas.

It appears mappers have decided that's not what's best.

Tagging objects should be based on the understanding of what the general
consumer of OSM accept it to be, not just a small group of "rail
enthusiasts" from Germany.

OSM should as much as possible try to remain agnostic towards a specific audience or use, we should strive to both be accurate and usable for both train drivers and public transport passengers.

See landuse=railway, railway=signal & railway=switch

This is not just a matter for rail enthusiasts from Germany.

Indeed.

 
 >the railway is from the rail network/infrastructure point of view and
public
transit from the passenger point of view.

This seems to be a common misunderstanding by those advocating PTv2.

I'm not advocating PTv2, for a long time it just seemed like duplication of tags and a waste but if the ability to separate out the rail infrastructure from passenger viewpoint can be done with the tagging schema then that's maybe one advantage.

railway=station & PTv2 are separate schemas. They don't interact. If there's something missing in one, a tag's meaning can't be amended in the other. This is the misunderstanding.

 
No, it's because the public area is what most people consider to be a
'station'. (& most are mapped as nodes)

 but use a new tag for rail infrastructure so you can still correctly map the station for train drivers.

Why would train drivers, looking at OSM, need to have just a couple of signals enclosed inside a polygon?

DaveF

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

On 10. Oct 2020, at 17:36, Dave F via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

Why would train drivers, looking at OSM, need to have just a couple of signals enclosed inside a polygon?


did you already have the occasion to ask commuters in your part of the world whether they believe the parts of a train station that are not accessible for the passengers are outside or inside of the station?

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, 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?

Cheers Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list

eventually they should all be upgraded to areas.

It appears mappers have decided that's not what's best.

I tried mapping some railway station as areas and I ended not doing this.

Either mapping would be quite arbitrary or include massive area that
is not really relevant.

first northern railway split is at

Including all this tracks feels ridiculous to me.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
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

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
On 11/10/2020 09:25, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Including all this tracks feels ridiculous to me.

Agreed.
Over the past few years in the UK I've been maintaining/checking the
railway=station tag to ensure there are the correct number.
I've the changed the few that were mapped as areas to nodes & swapped
the areas to railway=landuse. It allows accurate positioning of the label.

---------

After a discussion on Talk-GB I've also amended all railway=halt to
stations.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dhalt
To decide on size is far too arbitrary/subjective for OSM . What makes
on "small"? OSM requires objective tags to describe objects. I've added
request_stop=yes to those that only have stopping trains if flagged down
by a passenger, & looking to add more platform=* tags.  Both help to
accurately describe stations.

DaveF



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
Please send messages to forum, John.

On 14/10/2020 03:17, John D. wrote:
> unless you visit the platform or there is a visible sign how do you
> know where the train stops ?

Unsure of the relevance of that to this discussion.

> how is nodes better than area ?
>

Points have already been made.

DaveF


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 14. Oct 2020, at 15:44, Dave F via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Please send messages to forum, John.


from where are you citing here? A private email?

Can we please discuss publicly here, and keep private discussion private?

Thank you,
Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Georg Feddern-2
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list


Am 10.10.2020 um 00:35 schrieb Dave F via Tagging:
>
> I edited a copy of the diagram (A-simple-station.svg) of a station
> layout, primarily to remove any references to PTv2 tags, a completely
> independent, duplicating tagging schema, irrelevant to anything to do
> with the railway=station tag.

That is the main problem I think:
You think, that railway=* and PTv2 tags are duplicating tagging schemas.

But:
railway=* are _railway_ related tags - they are for infrastructure.
PTv2 tags are _public_transport_ tags - they are for the public
transport use cases.

And yes - these both are truly different.

--
Diese E-Mail wurde von AVG auf Viren geprüft.
http://www.avg.com


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
Please send all messages to the public forum Martin.


It was a post in reply to the topic.

Unlike a few train spotters in Germany I'm not scared to have all
discussions be public & a matter for record.

Please don't dictate over events on which you have no authority.

DaveF.

On 15/10/2020 10:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> from where are you citing here? A private email?
>
> Can we please discuss publicly here, and keep private discussion private?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Proposal of electricity=* and electricity:origin

Lukas Richert
Hello all,

after the comments on the confusing nature of the word 'source' in my
original proposal of 'electricity:source', I have now changed the name
to 'electricity:origin' as suggested on the discussion page.
Furthermore, I would like to revive and extend the proposal of the key
'electricity' as this previously conflicted with parts of the
electricity:source proposal and was not consistent.

Both proposal pages:

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity

[2]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/electricity:source

The idea now is to allow for the tagging of buildings or amenities that
have electricity. The rationale is described in more detail at [1]. Tags
such as access, fee, schedule and origin can then narrow down the
availability to the public and the question of financial or direct
origin of the electricity.

This is distinct from the drafted tag power_supply as it is used to
describe the type of sockets used at a specific outlet. The values for
that tag are still currently under discussion.

I would also not tag this as a subset of power=* as this maps the
facilities and features that relate to the generation and distribution
of electrical power and should not be used to map the consumers of
electricity.

I am eager to hear the feedback to the revised proposals!

Best regards,

Lukas




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Georg Feddern-2
On 15/10/2020 11:01, OSM wrote:


Am 10.10.2020 um 00:35 schrieb Dave F via Tagging:

I edited a copy of the diagram (A-simple-station.svg) of a station layout, primarily to remove any references to PTv2 tags, a completely independent, duplicating tagging schema, irrelevant to anything to do with the railway=station tag.

That is the main problem I think:
You think, that railway=* and PTv2 tags are duplicating tagging schemas.

They are. One of the creators on the Transit forum stated the intention was for PTy2 to supersede railway=* tags.


But:
railway=* are _railway_ related tags - they are for infrastructure.

Which wiki pages claim that?

PTv2 tags are _public_transport_ tags - they are for the public transport use cases.

Tell that to the contributors who are adding PTv2 to tourist stations (I think it might be to do with another cock-up in iD editor)


And yes - these both are truly different.

Which negates any desire to change the meaning of railway=station from "places where customers can access railway services or where goods are loaded and unloaded."

DaveF

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Feature Proposal - RFC - Proposal of electricity=* and electricity:origin

Lukas Richert
In reply to this post by Lukas Richert
(Fixed subject line for RFC)

> Hello all,
>
> after the comments on the confusing nature of the word 'source' in my
> original proposal of 'electricity:source', I have now changed the name
> to 'electricity:origin' as suggested on the discussion page.
> Furthermore, I would like to revive and extend the proposal of the key
> 'electricity' as this previously conflicted with parts of the
> electricity:source proposal and was not consistent.
>
> Both proposal pages:
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity
>
> [2]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/electricity:source
>
> The idea now is to allow for the tagging of buildings or amenities
> that have electricity. The rationale is described in more detail at
> [1]. Tags such as access, fee, schedule and origin can then narrow
> down the availability to the public and the question of financial or
> direct origin of the electricity.
>
> This is distinct from the drafted tag power_supply as it is used to
> describe the type of sockets used at a specific outlet. The values for
> that tag are still currently under discussion.
>
> I would also not tag this as a subset of power=* as this maps the
> facilities and features that relate to the generation and distribution
> of electrical power and should not be used to map the consumers of
> electricity.
>
> I am eager to hear the feedback to the revised proposals!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lukas
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list


sent from a phone

On 15. Oct 2020, at 15:12, Dave F via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

Please send all messages to the public forum Martin.



I will write to whoever I want, not your business. 

You may already know it, but for the avoidance of doubt I’ll tell you again: every thread and all contributions can be seen here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-October/thread.html

If the mail headers are confusing you can always cross check your inbox with the public archive.


It was a post in reply to the topic.

Unlike a few train spotters in Germany I'm not scared to have all discussions be public & a matter for record.


neither am I, and while I am not scared to participate under my real name, I understand that other people might have reasons to choose a pseudonym or shorten their last name, and it’s ok.

Cheers Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list


sent from a phone

On 15. Oct 2020, at 16:40, Dave F via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

Which negates any desire to change the meaning of railway=station from "places where customers can access railway services or where goods are loaded and unloaded."


I am perfectly fine with this definition, it was you who chose to ignore the “where goods are loaded and unloaded” part. 
My interpretation for railway=station is: the train station (all of it). I am neither a train spotter nor a buffer kisser (not sure this term exists in English), but it seems clear that the tag implies the whole railway station, regardless of its application on a node or an area.

Cheers Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Paul Allen
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 at 10:03, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:

buffer kisser (not sure this term exists in English)

I've not encountered it (but there's a lot I don't know).  This WIkipedia article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railfan doesn't mention it either.  One of the
few mentions I've found of it is at

All of which is going far off topic.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: railway=station areas

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On 17/10/2020 10:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


On 15. Oct 2020, at 16:40, Dave F via Tagging [hidden email] wrote:

Which negates any desire to change the meaning of railway=station from "places where customers can access railway services or where goods are loaded and unloaded."


I am perfectly fine with this definition, it was you who chose to ignore the “where goods are loaded and unloaded” part.

The diagram's previous incarnations made no mention of this part of the definition.

My interpretation for railway=station is: the train station (all of it). I am neither a train spotter nor a buffer kisser (not sure this term exists in English), but it seems clear that the tag implies the whole railway station, regardless of its application on a node or an area.

Which doesn't include signals/points way down the track.

DaveF
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12