Hello, Am Donnerstag, den 03.03.2016, 23:16 +0100 schrieb Michael Reichert: > I would add two additional categories: > > * importance=low: > * Location and served areas: small stops where most trains (even > local > trains) do not stop apart form a few "alibi trains" [1] (usually in > the > early morning and/or late evening) > * Traffic: few regional trains stopping at every station > * Examples: Rosenberg (Baden), Rammingen (Württemberg), Unadingen > > > * importance=sometimes > * Location and served areas: stops which are either only served by > irregular running historic trains on preserved lines or only on > special > (large) events > * Traffic: only historic trains / anything between two trains per > day > and multiple per minute > * Examples: Gerstetten (?), Welzheim > > Best regards > > Michael > > > [1] Usually two trains (one per direction) which only run to serve an > obligation of service (national railway companies are sometimes force > to > serve a line althought the do not really want it).
I think that we should not define too many categories for any special type of station. I think that the difference between importance=low and importance=local is too small to need a separate category. The category importance=sometimes may be a good idea, but even here I think that tagging those stations with importance=local provides enough information for most purposes. In my current draft at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rurseeka tze/Station_Importance_Draft, I just extended the definition of important=local with the aspects of importance=sometimes. Regards Alex
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Openrailwaymap mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/lists/listinfo/openrailwaymap
