Render transportation areas like the airports

[kocio-pl]

I think we should start rendering big (or just micromapped) transportation "stations" as we do with the airports. I mentioned it here and now I want to really do it.

For a start it would be good to render these areas as we do with the airports (number of tagged lines from TagInfo):

• amenity=bus_station - 11 243 (Adding area rendering for amenity=bus_station #2763)
• railway=station - 7 906 (Changing area color for railway=station #2707)
• public_transport=station - 5 319
• aerialway=station - 2 084
• amenity=ferry_terminal - 1 027 (Adding rendering for amenity=ferry_terminal #2385)
• aeroway=heliport - 75

For comparison:

• aeroway=aerodrome - 9 844
• aeroway=terminal - 5 551

@aerodrome color should be renamed then (@transportation-area maybe?).

The numbers are rough, since the lines may also be used for buildings. So the next step should be rendering such buildings as we do with terminals on the airports (@building-aeroway-fill and @building-aeroway-line colors, which should rather be @building-transportation-fill and @building-transportation-line).

Probably some areas should be corrected, like this terminal:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/131450912

because it is partially drawn on the water.

[jojo4u]

None of the tags with checkboxes are meant to be tagged mostly on buildings, they define the whole "transportation area" like aerodrome.

[kocio-pl]

Don't worry, I try to unify all the problems related to transport "stations"!

[HolgerJeromin]

Heliport has now 153 elements in the database. Probably because it is not rendered

[kocio-pl]

I'm glad you have noticed. I believe there are also not too much such objects in the world (list of heliports in Wikipedia contains also helipads, so it's hard to measure it precisely).

It's not my priority to show that sometimes numbers should not be limiting factor and that system coherence is important (see 3. in #3305 (comment)), but that's still something I would like to show, since it's the most similar to the standard airport. We have even the proper icon for it:

https://github.com/gmgeo/osmic/blob/master/transport/heliport-14.svg

[jeisenbe]

Since aeroway=heliport is the only remaining feature on the list, it would make sense to close this issue and open a new one with the title "Add rendering for aeroway=heliport"

[jeisenbe]

Oh, I see that aerialway=station does not have a polygon fill, the checkbox above was misleading.

I would suggest removing public_transport=station from the list, at least. It still might make sense to have a separate aeroway=heliport issue, since there is a proposed SVG icon as well.

[kocio-pl]

Since that was my ticket and I'm not committed to the idea of dropping public_transport (there is another comment there today), I propose to not close it at the moment.

I also don't see the need to create separate tickets for each type, because there is no big discussion to be separated, but if you want them for some reason, just go ahead, I don't mind that much.