[Talk-transit] JOSM latest takes forward/backward roles for route relations into account
Just a small hint on anyone working with relations using "forward/backward" roles and willing to do some experimenting: The latest JOSM (starting from revision 3788) includes a nice relation analysis and visualisation for these relations. See this ticket (scroll down for some interesting screenshots): http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/5109 Would be great if you could test this build with your relations and report possible issues. Be aware though that this isn't a tested release so you might encounter weird behaviour, data corruption and all other joys of beta testing. Download the latest JOSm from http://josm.openstreetmap.de Claudius ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
On 14 January 2011 18:53, ant wrote: > Hi, > > > On 14.01.2011 13:30, Michał Borsuk wrote: > >> Even invariant lines become challenging for beginners, because the >>> concept of forward and backward roles is really difficult to grasp. >>> >> I may have got it wrong, but on a simple line from A to B, with >> bus_stops serviced in both directions (a good majority of lines), I >> don't see any use of the roles. I have the information that "here, at >> this bus stops you have bus 105", and that's all I need now. I've used >> roles on lines that have different paths, and with the scarse >> information "out there", I managed to understand it, so again, we need >> >> Actually, you made me just realize that by doing that (not adding >> "forward" and "backard" to stops) I ignored the direction iformation, >> which would be useful to the disabled, but indeed that's a lot of work. >> > > It is not just useful, it is necessary in order to route pedestrians to the > correct one of two platforms. > I am now aware of that, but at this moment this is not my concern because: * I have a lot of bus stops without a pair, that is from the old "stop position" schema where a node on the road was marked as a stop * I have loads of bus lines without stops mapped at all. This is boring work, so no beginner will do it. Also, what is missing in Potlatch is the ability to take a value from a list for role, instead of having to type this. I hope P2 can deal with it. > > By the way, the wiki page on route relations [1] is completely pointless on > this matter. From the section "Members": > Yes! I've been raising this issue here, it may have died among other arguments: An overhaul and update of the documentation is more important than pushing the new schema. Do you have the resources to lead this project of cleaning the mess with wiki pages? I can help, but I can't supervise at this moment. -- Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia, Michał Borsuk ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
Hi, On 15.01.2011 02:20, David Peek wrote: ...Also, it is quite unlikely that a stop is served in only one direction whereas the road it resides on is used in both. For stops that are situated at a segment that is served only in one direction, it is clear in what direction the stop is used, isn't it.. Actually, this is not unlikely at all. All you need is an uneven spacing of bus stops on each side of the road, if only one node is marked for a stop on either side of the road. Yes, you're right, it is not that unlikely. But still, these role definitions are obsolete, because it has become common practice to put bus stops beside the road. If paired bus stops are marked separately on each side of the road - which seems to be the standard - only one is served in each direction, even if the road is used in both directions, so the reverse of your point appears to be true... In that case the definition given in the wiki doesn't apply any more, because, according to it, the choice of role explicitly depends on the way a node is part of. (Weak point by the way: which role is the right one for a stop node that is part of two ways having different orientations?) If I've misunderstood what you meant, my apologies. I hope this discussion actually gets somewhere useful - I'm getting annoyed at the amount of what I'm increasingly regarding as spam arriving in my inbox. Should we move the discussion to the proposal's talk page? cheers ant ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
