Hi Matthijs
Generally I don't think adding names to bus stops adds anything to the map
other than when it is an Interchange name- so they're the only ones I name.
Why? Generally because adding a name consisting of a street name where the
street name is already on the map I consider to be cartographic clutter and
totally redundant. Common names also tend to duplicate features that are
already named on the map and so are not really needed. For transport
applications the data is there to be used - no need to add it in a name.
This general principle of clutter from names is also why we haven't added
ward boundaries in urban areas- there'd be text from boundary names running
along roads that already have a name and the map would quickly become
unusable.
Regards
Brian
On 11 November 2013 23:20, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I noticed that we have nearly all bus stops in Birmingham on the map,
> including Naptan data, but most of the stops don't have a name tag.
> For the stops where we do have name tags, these tags are formed
> inconsistently. Name tags are necessary in order to display the name
> on the Transport layer, and to make them searchable.
>
> In Birmingham, all bus stops have a street name (Naptan: Street),
> which is the first line on the blue area of the shield, and a common
> name (Naptan: CommonName), often the intersecting street, which is the
> second line on the shield. Neither CommonName nor Street are
> individually sufficient to uniquely identify a stop, but together,
> they are. Some stops also have a red shield containing the interchange
> name (not in Naptan) plus a two or three character reference (Naptan:
> Indicator). A bus might stop at multiple stops of the same
> interchange.
>
> An example of a bus stop:
>
> Weoley Castle (Interchange) WE (Indicator)
> Castle Sq (Street name)
> Somerfield (Common name)
>
> The question is now, which of these should we use for the name tag?
> Currently, all of the following formats are in use:
>
> Street; CommonName
> CommonName
> CommonName Indicator
> InterchangeName Indicator
> Indicator
>
> Which format should we aim for?
>
> It should also be noted that the Naptan data contains some mistakes.
> Should we first check whether Naptan is correct, and then fill in the
> name tag? Or can we already add the name tags, and verify later? The
> first has the advantage that we only display correct names, while the
> second has the advantage that we have data quicker, and that errors
> might get discovered more quickly because the stop names will be
> displayed on the map.
>
> Please let me know what you think.
>
> Best regards,
> Matthijs
>
> ___
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
