It seemed like a good idea on the face of it. Stops on the highway became public_transport=stop_position, stops next to it public_transport=platform.
But then it was suddenly necessary to add both these objects to the route relations. Already the fact that more than one object became necessary to describe a single bus stop, should have raised alarm bells.
There are, of course, some positive things to say about to say about the new scheme. A route_master relation for a whole line. route relations to describe the various itineraries and stops.
But the stops, that’s where it goes seriously wrong. Why on earth is it necessary to add 2 objects to those route relations? As they describe all the variations, there are a lot of them. Lots of work to maintain them. And they break easily.
After the scheme was voted, I was trying my best to map stops according to it. I had my highway=bus_stop nodes which were all nicely positioned next to the highways, so it’s clear on which side of the road they are located.
So I asked on the mailing list: hey what public_transport to use for them? The answer was public_transport=platform. So far, so good.
Since I had 40000 stops to add for half of a small country, I was not going to bother with adding stop_position nodes as well. So I trudged along for a few years.
In the mean time in Germany and France they had a different idea, let’s convert those nodes next to the highway to platform ways (regardless of whether there was an actual platform present in some cases), oh and those stop_position nodes, let’s duplicate all the details for the stops.
So, for the sake of simplicity, I would like us all to come back to our senses. Map each bus stop, exactly once on a node next to the highways and only add these nodes to the route relations. That’s how I will continue to do it in Belgium, although unfortunately in Brussels somebody already started adding stop_position nodes everywhere and adding them to the route relations. Oh well.



# The wiki
The