Per title, I’m not sure if we have existing tags regarding these services (commonly known as ridesharing, although it might not be the most correct term). I know we have:
So, my question is: in those stands (usually in but not limited to airports), how do you tag these pickup points? Can we use amenity=ridesharing (or ride_hailing, if we have to stick to a preciser term)?
I would rather think it might be better to integrate it in the PT schema.
public_transport=stop_position with ride_sharing=yes, since usually the infrastructure is kinda similar to a public transport stop. Like a waiting area, benches,…
Doesn’t this tag requires the node to be linked to a way/area? If there is similarity with PT, then perhaps the bus stop is the most similar (highway=bus_stop), where you can map the existence of shelters etc.
Could you please describe which services the companies you mention provide? Are those taxi companies? They might be different around the world.
Can taxi drivers use those dropp off points as well?
highway=bus_stop is the “old” schema, public_transport is a bit more flexible in terms of which “public transport” is using this stop. That is why I suggested the “newer” one. Yes, public_transport=stop_position suppose to be part of the highway, so the waiting area would be rather public_transport=platform. Depends on what you want to map.
At Metro Detroit airport, there would be one waiting area (with benches, phone charger, heater,…) and about 10 stop positions for the Uber/Lyft drivers.
Depends on the location, but at larger US and Chinese airports those locations are usually separate. Like there is a dedicated location for ride-share providers and another one for taxi services. The access might be checked. For sure on smaller airports that is more flexible and instead of a specific car queue it’s rather a sign “wait here for ride sharing driver”.
These points are specific locations where these vehicles are allowed to pickup/drop-off passengers. They usually exist in big infrastructures (like airports or bus stations), and are separate from taxi stands (they are basically competitors).
The service is a bit different from taxi, because (in general):
in some jurisdictions taxis are considered part of public transport
taxis have prices defined by the government
taxis can have stands where they can wait for passengers
taxis can only operate with a specific and personal permit, and have a limited number of licenses
taxis can use specific lanes in the street
None of the above applies to ride hailing companies.
True, the public_transport=stop_position could be used, but I’m afraid that ride hailing companies cannot be considered any type of public transportation, and therefore I wouldn’t like to mix that with PT schema on OSM.
I still think these points are better mapped with a new amenity=* tag. Another option is to create a new taxi subtag (like taxi:ride_hailing=designated, for example), so we could reuse the existing taxi tag (and rendering), but I’m also uncomfortable with that because they are at the same time similar and distinct from taxis.
I just checked. In my country (Austria, Europe) Uber etc. are legally considered the same as taxis. Their drivers have the same requirements (license etc), all prices are regulated within a range. Specific taxi lanes can be used by both.
Even if there are some differences, they are still very similar things. Cars bringing people from a to b for money.
Would it be completely wrong to say Uber etc. also fall under amenity=taxi and add operator=* or other tags (government_regulated_fee=no ?) to it?
As far as these are mapped at all in OSM, rideshare seems to be the best established term. It only seems to be used as an access value so far, so doesn’t answer your question directly, but it suggests a name for any further tagging.
A recent discussion touches on some of these issues:
In general, rideshsring is not PT, but from the concept of those pick up location it is. Like if my friend would pick me up from the airport, we both agree to any spot and meet there. That’s private transport, from anywhere to anywhere. But at those locations ridesharing behaves like a public transport. It’s only a certain location where I can be picked up.
But they operate in a different way, they don’t have the obligation to provide service to you. They won’t wait in the taxi queue for you and you get served by the first taxi.
If you want to go this way, you should re-think the “pick-up concept” in OSM. At the moment amenity=taxi offers operator and taxi_vehicle. So you might want to rework all that to something more neutral in terms of taxi and ridesharing and other means of private transportation which come with dedicated pick-up locations. Like private limo-services, hotel shuttles, rental car shuttles,…
But again, from customer perspective they are all the same. I go to a certain spot, where I enter a vehicle to get to a destination.
For better or worse, this is how many Uber and Lyft pickup/dropoff points have been tagged in the U.S. I understand the logic, though this makes it more difficult to distinguish facilities for organized carpooling programs.
Yes, it would be wrong. As I mentioned in the other thread, airports are notoriously strict in prohibiting ride sharing drivers from using dedicated taxi facilities, even segregating them from literally every other ground transportation. The practical differences add up to much more than the difference between, say, a motorcar and an hgv in most of the countries I’ve been to.
They can’t even use cell phone waiting lots like other private passenger cars:
On the other hand, some taxi companies are blurring the lines. In some smaller U.S. cities, a company like zTrip has taken over the local taxi company, replaced its dispatch hotline with a mobile application, and done away with the airport taxi stand. It’s still a taxi company, but since you always have to book in advance, the airport now treats them similar to a ride sharing company. Although the signs say “Taxi”, this isn’t an amenity=taxi, because there are no waiting cabs for you to hail without using a phone.
Recently I visited Colombia, where taxis are alive and well. There, ride sharing services are just as common as in other countries, but it’s illegal to work for them as a driver. So at locations with a police presence, such as airports and metro stations, you have to hide your phone, sit in the front seat, and pretend to know the driver in order to avoid getting them in trouble. Needless to say, the dedicated ride sharing pickup/dropoff points that @matheusgomesms is asking about simply don’t exist there. If Austria regulates ride sharing vehicles exactly the same as taxis, then I suppose the same is true in Austria, so you don’t need to worry about encountering any unfamiliar tags anytime soon.
Excuse my annoyance, I will simply make the usual complain that ride-sharing is a misleading word that causes extra confusion when carpooling is discussed alongside. To be fair, ride-hailing is technically not the most accurate either, for the inability to hail on street, which is “hailed” virtually in app only.
Somewhat relatedly, they are called Transportation Network Company. This is obviously not a solution for the above question, but it suggests TNC should be network= not operator= , as the drivers not them operates, let alone owning the car. There are further complicated arrangements in operating and the legal form or licensing, eg the apps have to cooperate with local taxi companies in some countries, as if the latter operates via the apps. Semi-off-topic, the consistency of the terminology can be coordinated with delivery:partner= at the same time.
yes, the differences pointed out are likely referring to a specific country and not necessarily universally true in their entirety.
Thanks for all the discussion!
So, in the end, what’s the general agreement here? Some people say it’s like taxi, others not, and others propose using existing tags.
I’m really not sure which tag to use (I have a bunch of locations to tag), and I won’t open a formal voting. Checking using Overpass, the few mapped items I encountered were mainly amenity=taxi mapped. So if there is no consensus, I’ll use the taxi tagging, adding operator=Uber/etc (although I would pretty much prefer a dedicated and more precise tag).
Currently the closest established tags are amenity=taxi and amenity=car_pooling. Both are misleading: unlike a taxi stand, you can’t just show up and get a ride from a waiting taxicab. No amount of operator tagging can change that expectation. On the other hand, unlike a traditional carpooling staging area, you have to use a commercial service.
In my opinion, of the two tags, amenity=car_pooling is much less misleading from a rider and driver perspective. However, I recognize that it’s still a misnomer and would support a new tag for designated ridesharing pickup/dropoff points.
Thanks, Minh! So, let me do a quick and informal voting here (just to be clear, this is not a RFC nor a formal voting for a new tag.
I’m voting any of the last 2 new tags, but if there is no consensus, and if I had to choose an existing tag, I’ll probably use the car_pooling tag instead, per Minh’s last comment.
To be meaningful, =car_pooling needs at least eg fee=yes + reservation=required
As mentioned above, for the argument against =taxi , rather for focusing on taxis only, we can emphasize it’s for taxi ranks, waiting to be hired by you. However, I will mention a complication, official waiting / pick-up & drop-off spots for taxis reserved by phone or app. They are obviously not taxi ranks. So instead of =ride_hailing , both taxis and ridehailing/ridesourcing could also be considered together for a generic transport service waiting / pick-up & drop-off feature, usable on both of them and other traditional services (eg hotel limousines).
fee=yes and/or reservation=required is more or less already implied by amenity=car_pooling. Otherwise it’s a highway=hitchhiking.
Yes, the Louisville airport is a good example of how some taxi companies are emulating ridesharing services without using taxi stands (taxi ranks) anymore.
Another complication is that some PUDO points are quite ephemeral, existing only as an entry in a local ordinance or ridesharing service backend database, or as a temporary A-frame sign by a soccer stadium during a match, whereas others are much more substantial. I think here we’re talking about the ones at airports or hotels that at least have permanent signs. I’ve been to some airports (most recently the one in Manila) that even have branded waiting shelters and attendants to help you use the application and show you into the car once it arrives, reminiscent of a taxi rank.
If all these differences demand separate tags, then it really calls into question the recently approved highway=hitchhiking tag. Apparently the only reliable difference between that and amenity=car_pooling is fee=no. Regardless, let’s make sure we include dropoff points in any new tag, to avoid the lexical gap that I’m now facing with designated hitchhiking dropoff locations (locally called carpool dropoffs).