Proposal talk:Simplified public transport scheme (2019)

Go for it!

I was thinking a proposal like this myself. Thank you for working on it. I'm much in favor of simplifying the mapping of public transit features (which means "buses" 90% of the time, world-wide). It looks like this will be similar to Proposed_features/Refined_Public_Transport but even easier, I hope? --Jeisenbe (talk) 08:10, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! I'll soon make some diagrams (i'm currently without computer) and then announce a RFC. IMO, this proposal is more logical and thus easier than the Refined Public Transport Proposal because bus and tram stops are always mapped beside the road (they are mapped on the road or rail if there are platforms in the Refined Public Transport Proposal). Therefore, stop_area relations are never needed at bus or tram stops (only at stations) and stop_area_group relations are never needed at all. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 17:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Good, those were the two problems that I'd noticed with "Refined Public Transport"; no need to use relations. --Jeisenbe (talk) 22:24, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

While testing if this scheme works at more complex locations, i noticed that there are mixed stations: e.g. Wimbledon is a station for railways, undergrounds and trams, or Bremen Hauptbahnhof is station for buses and trams. Therefore, it seems that public_transport=station and the transport mode tags can't be abandoned and that it's better to abandon amenity=bus_station and railway=station instead. railway=halt and aerialway=station are probably better not abandoned because they seem more like stops than stations to me. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Wimbleton could be amenity=bus_station + amenity=railway - this is still fewer tags than public_transport=station + bus=yes + rail=yes - but actually it doesn't look like a bus_station, but a railway station that has a couple of bus stops on the street out front? And the tram stops are also mapped separately, e.g. - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3817927775 - so I'm not sure that it's a "tram station" either, it's just a couple bus stops, a couple of tram stops, and a railway station with several platforms, looking at the OSM data. But certainly there are places where a subway station is located right above a bus station, for example in Singapore - there I would use both amenity=bus_station and amenity=railway - as the Wimbletom example makes clear, "bus=yes" on a public_transport=station often just means "there is a bus stop somewhere at this train station" so that's not so helpful. The important thing is to map the amenity=bus_stop and railway=platform and tram=stop locations where passengers need to go. --Jeisenbe (talk) 00:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Bremen Hauptbahnhof is a tram/bus station, not Wimbledon. At Bremen Hauptbahnhof, buses and trams even share the same platforms. Strangely there isn't a PTv1 tag for a tram station, but even if there were a railway=tram_station tag, combining that with amenity=bus_station seems suboptimal as there should only be one main feature tag per object. Otherwise one had to decide whether it's a bus station or tram station, which is impossible.

Wimbledon is a train/underground/tram station with bus stops nearby. If Wimbledon were tagged bus=yes (which it isn't), i'd consider that a tagging mistake.

I don't know the Singapore examples, but at Bern, there's a bus station above the train station. These two stations are physically separated, so it makes sense to map two separate station elements. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 08:50, 27 September 2019 (UTC)