Proposal talk:Ticket type

Details of public_transport tickets, additional tags

I propose to add all types of public_transport tickets, as not all public transport networks have unified tickets. Long/short distance buses and trains should be defined with details. Also it is worth to mention additional useful tags.

You are right tagging all different public_transport systems seams to be the correct way - but it results in a couple of tags - what do you think of using tickets:public_transport=yes as short form of tickets:subway=yes+tickets:light_rail=yes+tickets:tram=yes+tickets:train=yes+tickets:bus=yes and all changes from this could be added/removed --KartenKarsten (talk) 09:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

We can't vorget that public_transport means not only buses and trams, but also airplanes and some other transport types. I proposу to use tickets:city_transport=yes instead of tickets:public_transport=yes. --Edward17 (talk) 18:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

trolleybus is missing in the combination. Also we could declare that exclusion also allowed: tickets:city_transport=yes+tickets:train=no means subway+trolleybus+light_rail+tram+bus. However city_transport is not very good name. Even suburban trains could go far out the city, while ferry could be inside city. OverQuantum (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

One thing I can say exactly: if the ticket office sells tickets for certain types of transport (not general "public transport", but e.g. only for buses, trolleybuses, trams), we can map it only with tickets:*=yes, without using tickets:*=no. --Edward17 (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I still have one concern. What about public transport areas? In my city the type of public transport doesn't matter. I'm not familar with the current public transport mapping. The mapping scheme should be general - therefore we have diffrent options

• 1. disallow the use of tickets:public_transport=*
• 2. use tickets:public_transport=* as short form for certain transportations
• 3. use tickets:public_transport=* in the local context (ticket for local public transport area) <-- my favorite for now

what do you suggest?--KartenKarsten (talk) 10:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

1. We can't make this. There are many cities where the type of public transport doesn't matter. This tag is exactly for them
2. No. When the list of public transportations is constant, we use tickets:_specific_transport_type_=yes
3. In my opinion, this variant is the best. But we have to precisely document this tag --Edward17 (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I've added the desciption - can you have a look at it? The only uncertenty left is, do we add the types of transportations even if it's tag with tickets:public_transport=*? Maybe we could go on the voting soon.--KartenKarsten (talk) 12:57, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

I think the description is good.

No, we add OR tickets:public_transport=yes OR tickets:_specific_transport_type_=yes. --Edward17 (talk) 08:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

And this should be written in text of the proposal! --Edward17 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Tag	description
tickets:subway=yes	tickets for subway are sold
tickets:light_rail=yes	tickets for light rail trains are sold
tickets:monorail=yes	tickets for monorails are sold
tickets:tram=yes	tickets for trams are sold
tickets:trolleybus=yes	tickets for trolley-buses are sold
tickets:aerialway=yes	tickets for aerialways are sold
tickets:ferry=yes	tickets for ferries are sold
tickets:long_distance_train=yes	tickets for long distance trains (intercity level) are sold
tickets:suburban_train=yes	tickets for short distance trains (local/regional level) are sold
tickets:train=yes	tickets for trains are sold (where train types are unknown or no difference)
tickets:suburban_bus=yes	tickets for short distance buses (local/regional level) are sold
tickets:long_distance_bus=yes	tickets for long distance buses (intercity level) are sold
tickets:bus=yes	tickets for local buses are sold (where bus types are unknown or no difference)

Tag	description
network=*	Network, if vending machine or shop belongs to some
operator=*	Company in charge of the operation of vending machine or shop
ref=*	Reference number, some unique ID of machine or shop inside network or operator
name=*	Name of shop, if present
opening_hours=*	Time when tickets are sold
payment=*	Available payment methods

OverQuantum (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I propose to change a desctiption of some tags.

Tag	description
tickets:bus=yes	tickets for city buses are sold

And about tickets:long_distance_train=yes and tickets:train=yes:

We don't have a special tag for train tickets, the type of which is unknown. The tag tickets:train=yes has been proposed in russian forum as alternanative to tickets:long_distance_train=yes because in Public Transport Scheme isn't tag route=tickets:long_distance_train. I don't understand why we schould use only values from Public Transport Scheme. In the situation when tickets for suburban trains and for long distance trains are sold in one ticket window, we can add two tags to it: tickets:suburban_train=yes and tickets:long_distance_train=yes --Edward17 (talk) 17:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Correlation between tags of route and tags of ticket shop allows to answer user question "Where to buy tickets for this transport route?". Not sure we need to support this right now, but it is worth to try. More detailed types of trains are specified in OpenRailwayMap - high_speed, long_distance, regional, commuter, car, car_shuttle, night and tourism. AFAIK, in Russia there is difference only between suburban trains (they are regional and commuter in one) and all others - common tickets for suburban trains are not personalized, while all others - are personalized. So suburban tickets are sold in more points. OverQuantum (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Can we use OpenRailwayMap tagging sheme, but only for those trains, tickets for which are sold? I mean tickets:long_distance_train=yes, tickets:regional_train=yes, tickets:commuter_train=yes.

OverQuantum, if I understand right, regional trains are as city train (known as "городская электричка"): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_rail --Edward17 (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

We can use OpenRailwayMap scheme, but right now I personally can't really distinguish regional and commuter trains in Russia. There should be some additional explanation for local usage. We have "пригородный электропоезд" (to be precise :) ) and "пригородный" means suburban. Suburban train Moscow - Zelenograd could be considered as commuter (connects parts of city), while suburban train Moscow - Tver as regional (pass different regions, 3 formally), however they have one set of tickets, only number of zones is different. We need to understand, is it really necessary to detail train and bus tickets so deep. OverQuantum (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

What about Russia and Ukraine: when we use values from Public Transport sheme, we can use only tickets:regional=yes (as network=regional) because we haven't difference between commuter and regional trains. --Edward17 (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

For Ukraine and Russia I have 2 options:

1. Select on tag from tickets:regional_train=yes and tickets:commuter_train=yes and use only him.
2. Use only tickets:suburban_train=yes.

KartenKarsten and everyone who knows, are tickets for regional and commuter trains in e.g. European countries or USA separated? Makes it sense to separate them in OSM? --Edward17 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

In my region of Germany there is a local transport zone which includes train connections. I would tag it just with the tickets:public_transport=*. Moreover there are still the normal train connections as well. As far as I know the nation wide company (Deutsche Bahn) sells tickets for every connection. But because of privatisation things became more complicated - now we have as well regional working companies who are selling tickets just for their network. I'm not sure how it works in detail, maybe they are forced to sell other tickets as well. (I use normally an other type of ticket which allows me to travel in all slow trains during a day in a special region of Germany). --> Finally I would say Ticket system in Germany is to complicated for a simple description - let's just use tickets:train=*.--KartenKarsten (talk) 09:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Some tags which must be in this table:

Transport:

Tag	description
tickets:airplane=yes	tickets for airplanes are sold
tickets:funicular=yes	tickets for funicular are sold

Non-transport:

Tag	description
tickets:concert=yes	tickets for concerts are sold
tickets:sport=yes	tickets for sports events are sold (Maybe it can be comleted with sport=*)

--Edward17 (talk) 18:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

One tag for not for transportation table:

tickets:circus=yes - tickets for circus are sold --Edward17 (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Tickets or ticket

shop=ticket (singular) while vending=tickets (plural) and tickets:(type)=yes - it should be well considered and explained, should we keep shop=ticket or force shop=tickets. Some values for shop=* are singular while others are plural. Tickets is preferred for new tags, as obviously there are a lot of tickets in shop or vending machine. But keeping tag for ~1600 shop=ticket is also a valid concern. OverQuantum (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Personaly I would prefere to force shop=tickets to have every ticket related tag in plural. But since most of use editors which are capable to provide "tag correction" it could stay as well. Any way renderers should use both of them. --KartenKarsten (talk) 09:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Good point. I think we should declare shop=ticket as allowed but discouraged, while shop=tickets as preferred way. OverQuantum (talk) 18:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with OverQuantum --Edward17 (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Or vending=* ?

Looking at taginfo, there is no less than 51'237 vending=* tag, with no less than 10'141 vending=parking_tickets and 6'758 vending=public_transports_tickets !!

These are big numbers, and I don't think you can manage to re-tag such a well established tag. Why not documenting vending=aerialway_tickets or vending=ski_tickets to come back to your primary concern ;-) ? And first of all, tag a few of them.

In other words, to provide a solution for both, follow the main stream or be ready to fight against windmill for a while :) --Yvecai (talk) 19:23, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Bad de facto scheme is not an excuse for fixing it with proposal. We could declare tickets=<type> and vending=<type>_tickets as deprecated/not recommended like wood or highway=bus_stop now. We could also agree with community for transition period, after which all deprecated tags will be autoconverted to new scheme or must be converted manually. OverQuantum (talk) 20:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

About vending=parking_tickets:

First, vending=* tag is used only for amenity=vending_machine!

As I understand, this Proposal describes tickets for public transport. Parking tickets are used to pay a parking and aren't relevant to the public transport. So we should not discuss them here.

An idea to declare vending=<type>_tickets as deprecated/not recommended tags I find good. --Edward17 (talk) 18:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

In general it isn't useful to use vending=* tag for shops because shops have much greater variety of articles

But in my opinion this proposal is not just about public_transport but also about tickets for sports or concerts. Parking_tickets could be described as well - or stay an exception. --KartenKarsten (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

When you really will use tickets:parking=yes, you have to describe this tag. I think, it must be in not for transportation table. --Edward17 (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Discussion Page

Hello!

First, one question: why we are discussing the proposal not on the Discussion Page of Proposal, but on the other page (User_talk:KartenKarsten/tickets)? I propose to move the whole discussion on the page Talk:Proposed_features/ticket_type. --Edward17 (talk) 17:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I started in my user space and forgot to change the link--KartenKarsten (talk) 19:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Payed in advance (only)

There are vending machines able to print or otherwise provide tickets payed in advance, via internet for example. I think it is possible to have this feature at shops and possible to find vending machines able only to print. I propose to specify explicit tags, additionally to general payment=*. OverQuantum (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Tag	description
payment:prepaid=yes	Available tickets payed in advance (via internet for example)
payment:prepaid=only	Available only tickets payed in advance, no ways to pay at place

vending=admission_tickets

There is tag vending=admission_tickets. In new sheme must be new tsg for this. I propose: tickets:admission=yes - admission tickets are sold --Edward17 (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure if we have tickets:concert=* it's already an admission ticket. In my opinion tickets:admission=yes should only be used if no more details are known. --KartenKarsten (talk) 09:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, hovever I have problems with translation.

I can't imagine the situation, when we know that this ticket office sells admission tickets, but we didn't know their type. I think the tag tickets:admission=yes schould be removed. --Edward17 (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Applies to

Why new tags are applying to Relations? --Edward17 (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

for future use^^ - for now it's not necessary you are right --KartenKarsten (talk) 09:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

How can we use tickets=* on relations in future? --Edward17 (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

if the ticket shop is on multiple levels in a building - but in my opinion it's far enough beeing mapped that way, so we can just ignore it--KartenKarsten (talk) 09:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Shops where tickets aren't main product

There are some shops where tickets are an additional assortment (e.g. convencience shop (shop=convencience) or newspaper kiosk (shop=newsagent) which sell also tickets). They must be marked as in this proposal: Proposed_features/Detailed_Shop_Features

I mean: e.g. shop=newspaper + shop:tickets=yes + tickets:footbal=yes

I think we have to add this example on proposal's page. --Edward17 (talk) 14:37, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

amenity=ticket_booth

There is tag amenity=ticket_booth. I think ticket booth is just ticket office and must be marked as shop=tickets. Tag amenity=ticket_booth must become deprecated. But... On pictures we can see ticket offices for race and for amusement park. For first we need tag tickets:autodrome=yes. For second - I'm not sure which tag is better: tickets:amusement_park=yes or tickets:leisure_park=yes or tickets:attractions=yes? Both tags must be in not for transportation table. --Edward17 (talk) 08:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

No, we don't need tickets:autodrome=yes tag. It is equal to tickets:stadium=yes + sport=motor. See my remark about stadiums below. --Edward17 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

tickets:attractions=yes could be combined with attraction=* to specify the attraction. tickets:monument=* could be a tag as well - or it should be integrated in attraction. --KartenKarsten (talk) 10:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

historic=* could used as well to specify tickets:attractions=yes and forget about tickets:monument=*--KartenKarsten (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

historic=* is used for mapping historical features. I think it can't specify any other tag. This rule works also for attraction=*.

Do we really need to describe attactions and monuments so precisely? When yes, I see 2 options:

1. shop=tickets + tickets=monument;attraction (here without s) + tickets:attraction=roller_coaster (here without s, any attraction=* value)
2. shop=tickets + tickets:monument=yes + tickets:attraction=roller_coaster (here without s, any attraction=* value) --Edward17 (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

I've an other idea what about: tickets:historic=any allowed value for historic and tickets:attraction=any allowed value for attraction. This way the ticket shop wont become an attraction^^.

We still have the option to use tickets=; separated list for all different types of tickets and just use tickets:*=* for multi value tags.--KartenKarsten (talk) 08:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I think it's bad idea to use for some tickets semicolon and for other tickets - namespace at the same time.

We will use namespace (tickets:*=*) anyway (for attractions and historic). So, now I consider that it's better to use only tickets:*=* everywhere. Without tickets=;-separated list. --Edward17 (talk) 12:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Small remarks

I have some small remarks:

• Please add tickets:cinema=yes in not for transportation table.
• Replace tickets:sport=yes by this:

Tag	description
tickets:stadium=yes	tickets for stadiums are sold. Can be completed with sport=*

• Remove from a description of tickets:bus=yes this:

(where bus types are unknown or no difference).

• Example: Public transport ticket:

in first column, second row must be only vending=tickets (without any old).

• Situation with trains (long distance/suburban/regional/commuter) is unclear. I'm waiting for OverQuantum. --Edward17 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for fixes. I have a few requests:

• Remove tickets:admission=yes (see #vending=admission_tickets).
• Fix literal errors: or by all types of transportation (in local transport zone + if existent other types) separately. --Edward17 (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

What about semicolon?

tickets:*=* can have only two values: yes and no.
In my opinion it's better to write them separated by a semicolon. E.g. shop=tickets + tickets=bus;trolleybus;tram.
What think you? --Edward17 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

sure we could do it as well as long only yes and no are allowed a ';' seperated list is possible - I don't mind what we use. Right now tools like tagInfo are better working with the current schema, but it could be time to push lists. --KartenKarsten (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

this is an important point to solve. In past I heard some voices which don't like ';' separated lists. And as far as I know there is no way how to add a JOSM preset with this way of mapping. By the way I would like to have a JOSM preset to support this proposal. But it could be still a way to go - just more work if we take it seriously. --KartenKarsten (talk) 08:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

tickets:train:* and tickets:bus: and else

It looks like we have different public transport principles in different countries (see above). So it is worth to add another abstraction level and let each country/area to decide specifically. Local rules could define that trains are high_speed/long_distance/regional/commuter (USA? Europe?) or suburban/long_distance (Russia) or else. Simple tickets:train=yes means - tickets for all types of trains. If software does not understand third word, it should warn user: "tickets for trains are sold but with some limitations". Same for buses. Same for other tickets if needed. If user is unsure which type of tickets are sold on tagging, he should rather use more generic tag and make notes via note=* or fixme=*. OverQuantum (talk) 21:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Tag	description
tickets:train=yes	tickets for all trains are sold
tickets:train:long_distance=yes	tickets for long distance trains (intercity level) are sold
tickets:train:suburban=yes	tickets for short distance trains (local/regional level) are sold
tickets:train:high_speed=yes	tickets for high speed trains are sold
tickets:train:regional=yes	tickets for regional trains are sold
tickets:train:commuter=yes	tickets for commuter trains are sold
tickets:bus=yes	tickets for all buses are sold
tickets:bus:suburban_bus=yes	tickets for short distance buses (local/regional level) are sold
tickets:bus:long_distance=yes	tickets for long distance buses (intercity level) are sold

Common useful combinations

It seems to me, that "useful combinations" should be common in the draft. It is definitely possible on transport, ex. Russian Railways sell such tickets - pay via internet and print at self-service terminal. OverQuantum (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Improvement of proposal

Well, one year since last post on this page...

I have some ideas how to make this proposal better.

1. Please delete all the information about replacing shop=ticket by shop=tickets and remove shop=tickets from examples.

This idea is good, but it is very difficult in OSM to change widely used tagging schema. Nobody will approve this proposal because of this one line.

And this proposal is not about changing of shop=ticket by shop=tickets, but about bringing to OSM a possibility to mark tickets type.

We can just write: "Why tickets:*=* and not ticket:*=*? Because one day we will use shop=tickets, but not yet" :)

2. Example: ticket for a football match in column "shop" should contain only next tags:

shop=ticket, tickets:stadium=yes, sport=football

3. We need also one separate example of using with this proposal. For example, next tags:

shop=newspaper, shop:tickets=yes, tickets:cinema=yes

Thanks! --Edward17 (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)