Are you sure? I don't see Oberdorf street anywhere near.

Of course I'll be more careful next time when retagging station types. Sorry for this.

I agree, and I usually check whether there are railway=light_rail tracks through the station. For this city I probably looked at the route relations and thought that there are no regular trains through these stations.

This is a result of a stop_area creating script, that collected stations + platform + entrances in stop_area relations. Every change was manually checked by me in JOSM, and there were some extra edits. There were no external sources. If I broke something, please show me. I assume I marked stations as light_rail, because light rail routes stop at these.

It doesn't matter much. The goal is to show that light_rail routes stop at a station. Some of these are used for trains or subways. And what if many modes of transportation stop at a station? You cannot add both station=subway and station=light_rail. That's why data consumers should support both options.

Okay, I expected that sooner or later I'll mix Budapest and Bukharest. Sorry for that :)

Thanks Zokert, I've marked these stops as closed. Now Bukharest metro and light rail are "green" again :)

http://osmz.ru/subways/hungary.html

Ilya

Hi,

You have deleted the "Puente Cal y Canto" station in this changeset. I have returned it, but please be careful next time. I'd recommend using JOSM editor, since it warns you about any issues.

Ilya

Hi!

In this changeset you deleted 14 route variants for H6 line, and modified other variants. With that, there are several stops that are not covered by routes. Could you please confirm that following stops are not served by any light_rail route, or restore routes that serve them:

* Timót utca osm.org/node/1025430054
* Beöthy utca osm.org/node/1025430724
* Egyetemi Tangazdaság osm.org/node/1346196823

Thanks,
Ilya

Hi,

You have removed the Solna Strand station in this changeset. I understand that was not intentional, but please try using JOSM for complex edits like public transport relations or coastlines: it tells you about every issue. I have restored the station.

Thanks,
Ilya

Hi,

Thanks for improving the coastline. Unfortunately, you've chosen the wrong direction for ways, and they were not closed. Please try using JOSM for editing: it shows all the errors before uploading.

Ilya

Hi, could you please explain this change? How come there are four relations for a station? What are you using the reference number for, why it is on a stop_area (is it?) and what are the restrictions for mapping it? Is that documented somewhere?

Посмотрел на улицу Свободы — разорвать её несложно, но согласен, что могут быть проблемы с отношениями. Про такое лучше спрашивать на форуме (в теме про Москву) или в телеграме @ruosm.

Здравствуйте. Я заметил и проверил этот пакет правок, про смещение линий. Конкретно здесь всё хорошо, но хочу напомнить, что большинство спутниковых снимков смещены, и перед работой нужно проверить смещение снимка по трекам. Для редактора JOSM (http://josm.ru) есть модуль базы смещений, который показывает смещения, определённые другими картографами.

osm.wiki/RU:%D0%98%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B0%D1%8D%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2

These route relations did not have any access tags on them. I have been writing a general subway processing script, and these routes stood out as having a single station. I guess I can add support for access=no tag, but these would need to be set (and they weren't).

Спасибо, починил. Была проблема в моей программе аудита.

Hi Tom,

Why did you change the line type? Wikipedia says it is a light rail line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lausanne_Metro#Line_M1

Ilya

Hi,

I've reverted my changes and then removed railway tracks from the five stop_area relations.

There is another issue with these stop_areas: such relation should have only one station node, while four relations have two or more. In that case the common way is to remove these station nodes from a stop_area and create separate stop_area relations, one for each station, adding there objects that are related to that station. Other object can be shared between the relations.

What I mean is, do you need all the station nodes — for subway, RER and others — to be in the same relations for railway stations, or may I remove them into their own relations?

In the meanwhile, please do come up with a solution not relying on grouping every OSM object (even untagged objects — what do you do with these?!) in a relation. An intermediate option using a site relation is okay, but in general cramming all the objects that are linked only by their geographic position is against OpenStreetMap principles: you can do spatial requests using tags and coordinates instead. It is not much harder, but a magnitude easier to maintain.

My email is ilya@zverev.info if you want any tips on working with the data.

Ilya

Just reverted the network tag in osm.org/changeset/53639647

Sorry, I don't understand your process. Nominatim does not use any relations: it returns only nodes and ways for railway stations. Regardless of relation types, you won't get neither "stop_area", nor "site" from it.

Depending on OpenStreetMap in this way, but storing hundreds of overweight relations and hoping nobody touches them, is a way to failure. If not me, then somebody else would fix these relations. I'd suggest you redo the entire process, untying your system from specific collections and using spatial relationships instead. But of course that takes a lot of time.

Proposals don't have to be voted on to take effect. Wiki in general has a little say over OSM data. Site relations has been used for more than ten years, and now there are half a million of these in the database.

How do you reference these relations from your system? If by identifiers, they have stayed the same. If you download a raw planet data and filter relations based on tags, you'll see a great change over the next few weeks.

But I assume you've been using these special tags like "line:SNCF" and that's what broke your app: I didn't remove these tags from new relations. I've just done it: please check how your applications work now.

I'm against reverting relation types, since it breaks virtually every practical application except yours. But I'm willing to find a solution that benefits both your company, my station parser and OpenStreetMap mapping in general.

Ilya