Re: [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?

[Christoph Boehme]

On 24/03/2010 08:57, Tom Chance wrote:
> That makes sense. So if a bus stop has one or more relations added, should
> it be counted as equivalent to a route_ref tag in the colour scheme, i.e.
> not marked as needing a route_ref tag?

Yes, that would be good. However, this would require a bit of work since
Novam is not aware of relations at all at the moment. If someone wants
to start working on this the source code is available on [1].

Best,
Christoph

[1] https://kofje.de/repos/naptan/novam/branches/xapi-backend/

> You could also check if there are relations matching up to route_ref entries
> for areas where they were put in.
>
> Tom
> 
> 
> On 24 March 2010 08:13, Shaun McDonald  wrote:
> 
>> The route ref is an interim data level until the relations are added. Think
>> of it as house numbers being initially added as points, and then full
>> building outlines being added at a later stage at which point the building
>> number gets transferred to the building outline.
>>
>> Shaun
>>
>> On 24 Mar 2010, at 07:58, Tom Chance wrote:
>>
>> That all sounds good, though if we add stops to route relations do they
>> really need route_ref?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2010 10:26 PM, "Christoph Böhme"  wrote:
>>
>> Tom Chance  schrieb:
>>
>>> On 23 March 2010 13:20, Christoph Boehme  wrote: > >
>>> Well, I just updated t...
>> Yes, exactly. My current plan is to have four types of stops in the
>> basic scheme:
>>
>> 1. Non-NaPTAN stops: Stops without naptan:*-tags. Basically plain
>>   old OSM bus stops.
>> 2. Unverified NaPTAN stops: Stops from the NaPTAN import which
>>   have a naptan:verified=no tag or which are missing the
>>   highway=bus_stop tag.
>> 3. Verified NaPTAN stops: Stops tagged as hightway=bus_stop and with
>>   either no naptan:verified tag or a naptan:verified=yes tag.
>> 4. CUS-stops: Stops with naptan:BusStopType=CUS because they are not
>>   marked on the ground and cannot be verified.
>>
>> Extended schemes would be:
>>
>> 1. Stops with notes: Highlight stops with a note or naptan:error tag
>> 2. Route information: Highlight stops which are missing the route_ref
>>   tag.
>> 3. Shelter and asset refs: Highlight bus stops which have shelter=yes
>>   and no asset_ref or which have no shelter tag at all (this might be
>>   quite Birmingham specific).
>> 4. Anything else?
>>
>> I suggest to keep the old schemes but rename them to the name of the
>> public transport network they apply to (e.g. "Transport West Midlands"
>> for Birmingham), since they are based on the amount of information that
>> is available on the signs used by a particular network.
>>
>> Best,
>> Christoph
>>
>>> Best, > Tom > > -- > http://tom.acrewoods.net
>> http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?

[Christoph Boehme]

Well, I just updated the Birmingham scheme two days ago to accept
naptan:verified=yes, because Andy asked for it.

Perhaps it makes sense to reorganise the schemes to have only one basic
scheme which displays verification status, CUS and notes/errors and a
number of specialised schemes building on top of the basic one for
information that is not available everywhere like route references,
shelter information and asset references.

Christoph

On 23/03/2010 12:59, Tom Chance wrote:
> Oh, well, I don't mind really. I've just assumed that the tag should be
> deleted as the Birmingham scheme also shows them needing work. It is a bit
> confusing having the three colour schemes when I'm aiming to fix the data up
> to a canonical OSM standard.
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> On 23 March 2010 12:16, Christoph Boehme  wrote:
> 
>> Tom,
>>
>> If you wish I can change the Hull scheme to mark stops with
>> naptan:verified=yes as completed as well.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Christoph
>>
>> On 23/03/2010 09:38, Tom Chance wrote:
>>> Hello there,
>>>
>>> I had a look at the NOVAM tool for bus stops to check my area:
>>>
>> http://mappa-mercia.org/novam/?scheme=hull&zoom=15&lat=51.46602&lon=-0.07598&layers=BT
>>>
>>> I then updated a load of bus stops, most of which I just needed to delete
>>> the 'naptan:verified' tag from:
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4205203
>>>
>>> But days later NOVAM still shows them as needing correcting, and if I
>>> download the area in XAPI lo-and-behold they seem unchanged:
>>>
>> http://xapi.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/node[highway=bus_stop][bbox=-0.08537,51.45112,-0.05885,51.4754]
>>>
>>> Isn't XAPI meant to only lag ten or so minutes behind the API?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
> 
> 
> 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?

[Christoph Boehme]

Tom,

If you wish I can change the Hull scheme to mark stops with
naptan:verified=yes as completed as well.

Cheers,
Christoph

On 23/03/2010 09:38, Tom Chance wrote:
> Hello there,
> 
> I had a look at the NOVAM tool for bus stops to check my area:
> http://mappa-mercia.org/novam/?scheme=hull&zoom=15&lat=51.46602&lon=-0.07598&layers=BT
> 
> I then updated a load of bus stops, most of which I just needed to delete
> the 'naptan:verified' tag from:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4205203
> 
> But days later NOVAM still shows them as needing correcting, and if I
> download the area in XAPI lo-and-behold they seem unchanged:
> http://xapi.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/node[highway=bus_stop][bbox=-0.08537,51.45112,-0.05885,51.4754]
> 
> Isn't XAPI meant to only lag ten or so minutes behind the API?
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?

[Christoph Boehme]

I hope the load is not due to Novam using the server now.

Novam is displaying the value of xapi:planetDate below the map key to
give an indication of the age of the data. Perhaps the attribute could
be amended with a full timestamp of the last update?

Cheers
Christoph



On 23/03/2010 11:49, 80n wrote:
> Tom
> That instance of XAPI is lagging a bit due to recent heavy load.  Its
> currently at 2010-03-22T15:52:02Z
> 
> Your changeset is about three hours after that time so it should come
> through later today.
> 
> 80n
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Tom Chance  wrote:
> 
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I had a look at the NOVAM tool for bus stops to check my area:
>>
>> http://mappa-mercia.org/novam/?scheme=hull&zoom=15&lat=51.46602&lon=-0.07598&layers=BT
>>
>> I then updated a load of bus stops, most of which I just needed to delete
>> the 'naptan:verified' tag from:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4205203
>>
>> But days later NOVAM still shows them as needing correcting, and if I
>> download the area in XAPI lo-and-behold they seem unchanged:
>>
>> http://xapi.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/node[highway=bus_stop][bbox=-0.08537,51.45112,-0.05885,51.4754]
>>
>> Isn't XAPI meant to only lag ten or so minutes behind the API?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> --
>> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NOVAM viewer

[Christoph Boehme]

Thomas Wood wrote:
> 2009/9/16 Andy Allan :
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Christoph Boehme  wrote:
>>>
>>> Robert Naylor wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:27:16 +0100, Brian Prangle
>>>>  wrote:

>>>> How about adding an option to set wheelchair=yes to mark the new higher
>>>> kerbs that are suddenly appearing everywhere (at least round here anyway)
>>>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pobice/3925707792/
>>> I would prefer to call it something like barrierfree=yes as it is not
>>> only helpful for wheelchair users.
>> I don't see a barrier elsewhere. Let's mark what's physically there
>> instead of the implications of the impact of not having whatever is
>> being mapped. So if there's a raised kerb at the bus stop, mark that
>> there is a raised kerb. kerb=raised?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andy
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
> 
> I have a feeling this is what the germans may call a  highway=platform

Well we do but only at a bus station and not a single bus stop. However, 
it would describe the thing quite well, I think.

Christoph

> 
> (Anyone feel a massive pt scheme tagging discussion coming on?)

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NOVAM viewer

[Christoph Boehme]

Robert Naylor wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:58:15 +0100, Christoph Boehme  
> wrote:
>> Robert Naylor wrote:
>>>
>>> How about adding an option to set wheelchair=yes to mark the new higher
>>> kerbs that are suddenly appearing everywhere (at least round here 
>>> anyway)
>>>
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pobice/3925707792/
>>
>> I would prefer to call it something like barrierfree=yes as it is not
>> only helpful for wheelchair users.
>>
> 
> Maybe just raised_kerb=yes or kerb=raised as I'm not sure if its just me 
> but barrierfree doesn't really suggest wheelchair/buggy/what ever 
> accessible.

kerb=raised is a good idea (which could be combined with kerb=lowered 
for pedestrian crossings) as the bus stop only becomes accessible (for 
wheelchair users) if it is served by a low-floor bus.

> In fact it sounds more like tagging that there isn't a barrier=fence or 
> something in between the bus and the bus stop.

That because I should have consulted a dictionary instead of translating 
the german "barrierefrei" to english literally. Then I would have 
noticed that what I meant is "accessible" and that "barrier-free" is not 
widely used (according to wikipedia [1]).

Cheers,
Christoph

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrier-free

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NOVAM viewer

[Christoph Boehme]

Robert Naylor wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:27:16 +0100, Brian Prangle  
>  wrote:
> 
>> Hi everyone
>>
>> Shelter = yes/no I think is essential to leave in as a requirement as to
>> whether a bus stop is completley surveyed or not. For two reasons:
>> indication of a shelter is a representation of what's present on the  
>> ground
>> and it's a pretty siginificant presence ( after all we tag and map  
>> smaller
>> things like post boxes and park benches!); and it's also useful for bus
>> passengers to know whether they're going to get wet or not when waiting  
>> for
>> a bus ( for when we can eventually actually render this on maps)
> 
> 
> How about adding an option to set wheelchair=yes to mark the new higher  
> kerbs that are suddenly appearing everywhere (at least round here anyway)
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pobice/3925707792/

I would prefer to call it something like barrierfree=yes as it is not 
only helpful for wheelchair users.

Cheers,
Christoph

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NOVAM viewer

[Christoph Boehme]

Peter Miller wrote:
> 
> On 15 Sep 2009, at 08:27, Brian Prangle wrote:
> 
>> Hi everyone
>>
>> Shelter = yes/no I think is essential to leave in as a requirement as 
>> to whether a bus stop is completley surveyed or not. For two reasons: 
>> indication of a shelter is a representation of what's present on the 
>> ground and it's a pretty siginificant presence ( after all we tag and 
>> map smaller things like post boxes and park benches!); and it's also 
>> useful for bus passengers to know whether they're going to get wet or 
>> not when waiting for a bus ( for when we can eventually actually 
>> render this on maps)
> 
> So we can have bench=yes;bin=yes;lamp_post=yes on the same node if there 
> are these other items attached to it.
> 
> Personally I would prefer bus_stop=shelter/pole/customary/etc/etc to 

I really like this idea. It would also allow us to get rid of 
physically_present=yes/no.

Christoph

> shelter=yes/no as it allows much greater richness and gives us a place 
> to identify as stop as customary easily. It also fits with the pattern 
> 'key=x' and the 'x=' with more details of the feature
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb