Should `name` be used on railway platforms?

A recent change on the railway=platform wiki page made me wonder whether there’s consensus regarding the use of name on railway platforms. (The linked change was later reverted.)

I think it’s uncontroversial that a hypothetical platform named after, say, a railway worker or some special event, should have a corresponding name tag. However, using name for some sort of a platform reference/station name combination like “Platform 2” or “XYZ Station, Platform 1” appears to be much more common (taginfo says about 32.5% of railway platforms have a name set – almost as many as have a ref!). Whether such names should be encouraged or discouraged appears to be somewhat controversial. The wiki currently lists name as an optional tag and avoids describing which names should be used:

Name of the platform, if it has one

I’d like to know how the community thinks about this.

How should setting a name like “Platform 2” on railway=platforms be handled?
  • should be encouraged
  • should be optional (i.e. similar to how the wiki page currently describes it)
  • should be discouraged
  • (i just want to see results)
0 voters

To add some additional context, I’m sure that the majority of the uses of name on railway=platform comes from public_transport=platform (which many railway=platform also have) and thus share the name with the corresponding stop, not the platform number itself (since there already is a better tag for it, one which is language independent: ref / local_ref).

In theory, name can be dropped on public_transport=platform if they’re already connected to a public_transport=stop_area, though they still are added to the platforms nonetheless and QA like StreetComplete (which deliberately ignores relations) force a name on these anyway.

3 Likes

That’s correct, though it should contain only the name of the stop. Just to quote the wiki:

The name of the station/stop. Platform numbers are given using ref=*.