On 14 Sep 2009, at 18:02, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
Sent: 10 September 2009 3:29 PM
To: Christoph Böhme
Cc: talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] NOVAM Viewer
On 9 Sep 2009, at 22:06, Christoph Böhme wrote:
Hi!
Ciarán Mooney general.moo...@googlemail.com schrieb:
I am trying to merge some bus stops on Penns Lane, Sutton
Coldfield.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.53496lon=-
1.81479zoom=15layers=B000FTF
I have moved them all to the correct position. Some of them were
spectacularly off, I was very surprised that the Naptan data was
that
bad!
However on Xoff's little NOVAM viewer I can see they have changed
colour to orange and they are incomplete, but I don't know why.
What
tags are they missing??
I can only see one orange stop which is missing the shelter tag. Did
you manage to fix the other ones?
The rules for the colouring of the bus stops are as follows:
Bus stops should show up green if they have
a highway-tag [1]
AND a naptan:AtcoCode-tag
AND NO naptan:unverified-tag
AND NO naptan:verified=no
AND a 'route_ref' tag
AND a shelter tag.
Ok, but why is the route_ref tag required? I don't intend to add
route
refs to the stops - I am expecting the software to pick that up from
the associated routes. Can you remove that requirement or I might end
up adding null route_ref tags just to make NOVAM useful to be ;)
When surveying in Brum all the route refs are on the bus stop signs.
So
that’s why we put them on the stop (ie adding what it says on the
ground).
It's also a lot easier to add the routes if you know which stops
they go to
:-)
However we don't have route numbers on the flags, and many stops don't
have timetables either so the insistent on having this tag forces me
to either 'game' the tags to make NOVAM useful, or to ignore NOVAM
which is a shame.
Please can you disable the requirement for the route_ref tag for the
benefit of the great unwashed who live in parts of the world that
spend less on their bus stops than dear Brum.
I am not sure that the shelter tag should be essential. I have added
it if there is a shelter and left it off if there is not. Could you
represent in the symbol if it is a shelter, but not use shelter=yes/
no
as a requirement for the stop being green
Forcing the shelter to be yes of no I find a useful check for
situations
where I added data some time ago and need to go back and wrap up
verification. But I agree, its not something that needs to be
required
I am comfortable to go round adding shelter=no tags - not too much
work and it do add information. However I won't unless the requirement
for the route_ref tag goes because otherwise I can't get NOVAM to help
me.
A stop is considered a plain naptan stop (blue) if it has
NO highway-tag
AND a naptan:AtcoCode-tag
AND a naptan:unverified-tag OR a naptan:verified=no.
But our import had highway=bus_stop turned on - it would be much more
useful for most people to ignore that tag for this test.
I guess Christoph is going to need to deal with the West mids folks
who have
the data imported without the bus_stop attribute and everyone else
that
does.
Plain OSM stops (yellow) must have
a highway-tag
AND NO naptan:AtcoCode.
Fine
And finally there is the concept of a physically not present stop
(grey). This is a bit unfinished as we have not really decided
what to
do with these stops. At the moment a stop classifies as not
physically
present if it has
NO highway-tag (to prevent it from showing up on the map)
AND a naptan:atcoCode-tag
AND a physically_present tag set to 'no'.
This would be very useful to show
Yep, there are lots of customary stops in the NaPTAN data in housing
estates
which don’t have any physical presence.
And in my town they are terrible for getting them all mixed up - many
of the ones they say are customary are really there and vice versa, so
it will be handy to have a clear presentation.
All remaining stops are displayed as an orange stop. This is a bit
of
catch-all which does not actually display merged stops but
everything
that is not explicitely marked finished or *not* merged.
On the basis of the above comments all my stops are orange which is
less that optimal!
We could do with some more documentation! And then starting to
publicise it maybe?
A number of people started using it (at least I am constantly
receiving
error reports when people try to use the not yet implemented
functions).
After talking to Brian last Thursday I have decided to not develop
the
actual merger any further as merging can easily be done with josm.
Also, things like stop areas add lots of complexity to the merging
process and it would be difficult to implement this all. So, I will
concentrate on improving the viewer which seems
