Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism -> a real example from Zürich
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Michael von Glasow wrote: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/611446 > Single-direction, the first stop (Bonola) is a platform member (no stop > member exists for this one); all others are stop members. > > Both directions rendered: > http://78.46.81.38/api/sketch-line?network=SITAM&ref=80&style=padua As far as I can tell the sketch-line ignores the highway=platform/role=platform ways. I think Bonola renders because it's a stop and a platform in the reverse direction relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/611538 Richard ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism -> a real example from Zürich
On 02/07/2011 10:45 AM, Richard Mann wrote: Can anyone point me to a route relation with platform& stop members, so I can check how the line-diagram service works in that situation? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/611446 Single-direction, the first stop (Bonola) is a platform member (no stop member exists for this one); all others are stop members. Both directions rendered: http://78.46.81.38/api/sketch-line?network=SITAM&ref=80&style=padua Michael ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism -> a real example from Zürich
On 02/07/2011 10:45 AM, Richard Mann wrote: On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote: I did not play around with actual renderers, but in theory the renderer should be able to get the diagram out of the order of the stops, regardless of the role. If one stop is twice in the route relation it should be obvious that it has to be some kind of loop. So in theory forward_stop and backward_stop can be replaced by the role stop. In theory data users should be able to do without roles at all (though they might appreciate some help if there are a lot of direction-specific stop names), and data users should be encouraged not to depend on them. I think the "simplified" advice is that roles aren't required (but that if you want to make the line-diagram service work with a two-directions relation, then - for the moment - you need to do xyz). Can anyone point me to a route relation with platform& stop members, so I can check how the line-diagram service works in that situation? A normal route with two variants in one direction: http://78.46.81.38/api/sketch-route?1244881&1274167&1244883 A kind of ring route, but first/last tree stops are identical: http://78.46.81.38/api/sketch-route?1342764 Teddych ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism -> a real example from Zürich
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote: > I did not play around with actual renderers, but in theory the renderer > should be able to get the diagram out of the order of the stops, regardless > of the role. If one stop is twice in the route relation it should be obvious > that it has to be some kind of loop. So in theory forward_stop and > backward_stop can be replaced by the role stop. In theory data users should be able to do without roles at all (though they might appreciate some help if there are a lot of direction-specific stop names), and data users should be encouraged not to depend on them. I think the "simplified" advice is that roles aren't required (but that if you want to make the line-diagram service work with a two-directions relation, then - for the moment - you need to do xyz). Can anyone point me to a route relation with platform & stop members, so I can check how the line-diagram service works in that situation? Richard ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
