That's the only way stop_area relations are useful for me. To relate a platform to stop_positions. When I'm building route relations, I have all the platforms in the correct order. What I then want to figure out is which ways need to be added to the route relation. Having 2 platforms and 2 stop_postiions in one stop_area is no help in that case. And if it can be resolved by means of proximity, then the stop_area wasn't needed for that purpose.
Polyglot 2016-11-15 19:50 GMT+01:00 Tijmen Stam <mailingli...@iivq.net>: > On 15-11-16 18:26, Jo wrote: > >> I tend to ignore those validator messages from JOSM. We could invent >> stop_area_group, but then we would simply get different warnings. >> >> When I make stop_area relations, I include everything that belongs >> together for one side of the road or that belongs to 1 platform in a bus >> station. >> > > Whoa, that's quite different from how I interpret the stop_area. For > example, for a "normal" bus stop, this would include 4 nodes (or 2 nodes > and 2 ways): a platform and a stop_position for each direction. > > A bus station with 6 platforms would contain 12 nodes/ways at least, 2 per > platform, + associated shelters, station nodes etc. > > What makes you think a stop_area belongs to exactly one > stop_position+platform? > > Tijmen >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
