[WIP] Adding rendering for public_transport=platform #3232
Conversation
| 'power_' || CASE WHEN power IN ('generator') THEN power ELSE NULL END, | ||
| 'tourism_' || CASE WHEN tourism IN ('viewpoint') THEN tourism ELSE NULL END | ||
| ) AS feature, | ||
| access, | ||
| religion, | ||
| tags->'denomination' as denomination, | ||
| tags->'generator:source' as "generator:source", | ||
| tags->'bus' as bus, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this blow up the XML with a combinatorial explosion?
| @@ -1663,6 +1666,8 @@ Layer: | |||
| OR tags->'memorial' IN ('plaque') | |||
| OR military IN ('bunker') | |||
| OR highway IN ('bus_stop', 'elevator', 'traffic_signals') | |||
| OR tags->'public_transport' IN ('platform') | |||
| OR tags->'bus' IN ('yes') | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not needed, we don't render bus=yes without public_transport=platform
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What would you propose to do instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove the line. You could further restrict the public_transport condition to only get those with bus=yes, but that makes no difference to the rendering
| @@ -1795,6 +1803,8 @@ Layer: | |||
| OR military IN ('bunker') | |||
| OR tags @> 'emergency=>phone' | |||
| OR highway IN ('bus_stop', 'elevator', 'traffic_signals') | |||
| OR tags->'public_transport' IN ('platform') | |||
| OR tags->'bus' IN ('yes') | |||
| @@ -1764,6 +1770,8 @@ Layer: | |||
| tags->'tower:construction' as "tower:construction", | |||
| tags->'tower:type' as "tower:type", | |||
| tags->'castle_type' as castle_type, | |||
| tags->'public_transport' as public_transport, | |||
| tags->'bus' as bus, | |||
| @@ -2416,6 +2435,8 @@ Layer: | |||
| OR historic IN ('memorial', 'monument', 'archaeological_site', 'wayside_cross', 'fort', 'wayside_shrine', 'castle', 'manor') | |||
| OR tags->'memorial' IN ('plaque') | |||
| OR highway IN ('bus_stop', 'services', 'rest_area', 'elevator') | |||
| OR tags->'public_transport' IN ('platform') | |||
| OR tags->'bus' IN ('yes') | |||
|
Public transport is mature, more flexible and more coherent standard, so it's a good example to talk about handling such cases. Some are less obvious, like |
|
General chart to show the comparison of the old and new scheme - it's not accurate, since only ~500k of the new one is combined with
So the old one is clear winner, however both numbers are very high and the ratio is just 4:1 (the same order of magnitude). The question is when should we change rendering? When ratio will be 1:1? How should we avoid fragmentation - when the new scheme will have |
|
sent from a phone
On 13. May 2018, at 05:40, kocio-pl ***@***.***> wrote:
The question is when should we change rendering? When ratio will be 1:1? How should we avoid fragmentation - when the new scheme will have n+1 uses should we drop n uses of the old one? If not - how long should we keep both? And when we could start showing the new one if both could be rendered?
I suggest you drop rendering of the old scheme when usage drops below 2000 instances.
What would be interesting in order to decide for supporting the “new” scheme would be the numbers of objects that are only tagged according to the new scheme.
|
|
By the way: Is it intentional that we render currently |
|
sent from a phone
On 13. May 2018, at 09:54, Lukas Sommer ***@***.***> wrote:
The wiki describes it as only for nodes
IMHO the wiki might be wrong.
|
Given that also the wiki describes describes it also as “Its position may be marked by a shelter, pole, bus lay-by, or road markings.” at least for bus lay-by and shelter, using an area sounds reasonable. |
|
I think that also fits on this topic: why do we render |
|
Looks like the revolution is long over and
|
|
@dieterdreist expecting people to map according to the "new" scheme exclusively without their stops getting renderd is ludicrous. I've tried that many many years ago, then resorted to double tagging the whole lot. In the present, I don't really care anymore. The point has become moot. We tag highway=bus_stop to get them rendered and p_t=platform/stop_position to please those who like the new scheme. |
|
for info the supremacy of public_transport=platform over highway=platform is even clearer if we take into account the duplicate tag |
|
I see no reason why the new public_transport=platform should not be rendered. Not rendering it is causing a large amount of bus stops to have both public_transport=platform and highway=bus_stop, which should not be necessary. |
|
The point of not rendering public_transport=platform was to stop people from using the new system. This is not working, however, and the result is just redundant tags on all bus stops. This should be merged. |
|
Many we use highway=platform to represent the physical platform, and highway=bus_stop for the point of that platform where the bus stops, this is an example of platform with several stops inside https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/114037316#map=19/-34.60004/-58.38183, how do you propose to differentiate this if highway=bus_stop and highway=platform becomes the same as public_transport=platform? |
As far as I know PTv2 has appropriate tags for both of these cases: Edit: Sorry, I see what you're saying in regards to differentiating the rendering, forgot I was reading the carto issues. However, wouldn't this be an uncommon use of |
|
stop_position indicates the place on the street where the buses stop, in
this case highway=bus_stop indicates where is the signaling that indicates
where passengers should wait for the different buses that stop on the same
platform, in addition there are many who prefer not to use stop_position
for having no use (the software can detect where a bus can stop on the
platform)
|
|
Edit: Sorry, I see what you're saying in regards to differentiating the rendering, forgot I was reading the carto issues. Of course, how do you think representing physical platforms? Now they have a gray color like the train platforms, while highway=bus_stop has the symbol of a blue bus, are now both a blue bus? |
matthijsmelissen
changed the title
|
@kocio-pl, are you going to work on this PR further? It seems that the mappers have decided to use public_transport=platform, as discussed above: #3232 (comment) |
|
I am still not able to do more tasks than currently, be it testing/merging PRs or just tuning my own code, and I don't know when I can get back to it. If you - or anybody else - would like to take over where I have left it, I'm fine with that. |
I second this. Can anyone supply link with documentation why Neither https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:public_transport%3Dplatform nor https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=625726 is explaining this. |
|
Currently I think rather about avoiding such duplicates and rendering this tag only when not associated with already rendered types of platforms. Transport platform is very wide category and it's worth rendering. |
|
Given there's been open technical issues with this PR for a year, @kocio-pl doesn't foresee having time, and the relevant part of code has been significantly refactored, I'm going to close this PR. If someone wants to take this up and write a new PR, they can do so, even though I am personally opposed to rendering it, as stated above. |
OK, sounds sane for me.
Do you oppose to rendering it only when this would be duplication of already rendered tag or any |
Is there |
|
IMHO, we have a deadlock here. Now if we don't include rendering to public_transport=platform (as node+way+area) because it is double-tagging with highway=bus_stop, we're having double tagging. public_transport=platform is part of the widely used PT_v2 schema. Rendering support would diminish much of the opposition to it, as "it needs highway=bus_stop to be rendered" at the moment. The reason to use public_transport=platform over highway=bus_stop is |
|
sent from a phone
On 11. May 2019, at 18:48, IIVQ ***@***.***> wrote:
Much of the opposition to public_transport=platform (as a way or area, but also as a node) comes from it not being rendered on OSM-carto, thus necessitating a highway=bus_stop or railway=tram_stop node to be rendered.
it is also semantically questionable for a simple bus stop to refer as a platform to it, and the fact 2 tags are required for what was more elegantly done with one, also isn’t exactly convincing
|
|
The public_transport=platform should be seen as "a place where people wait to board a bus/tram/train", not as a physical raised platform. There are more misnomers in the OSM tagging scheme (best example: highways with access=no, where a highway in British English is by legal definition a public access road). We could argue about the whole necessity of public_transport=platform all over again, but that's been done years ago (83 to 6 vote for the PTv2 schema in 2011) and there are other platforms(sic!) for this discussion. |
|
sent from a phone
On 12. May 2019, at 21:11, IIVQ ***@***.***> wrote:
Also, it does unify very similar things for different modes (bus/tram+train) into one concept.
is a bus stop really very similar to a train station? Maybe a train station is more similar to an airport, an aerial way station or a ferry port? It depends on the criteria, and I believe many people have not been convinced that the promoted benefit of pulling bus stops and rail based boarding under the same umbrella was worth the hassle that comes with changing a widely used, single tag to a combination of two tags.
|
|
The public_transport=platform should be seen as "a place where people wait to board a bus/tram/train", not as a physical raised platform. There are more misnomers in the OSM tagging scheme (best example: highways with access=no, where a highway in British English is by legal definition a public access road). We could argue about the whole necessity of public_transport=platform all over again, but that's been done years ago (83 to 6 vote for the PTv2 schema in 2011) and there are other platforms(sic!) for this discussion. |
Fixes #435
Changes proposed in this pull request:
Initial code renders
public_transport=platform+bus=yesthe same ashighway_bus_stop. It should be decided how to render platforms for multiple types of transport - for example bus+tram.