Re: [Talk-transit] Proposed Feature - 2nd RFC - Public Transport
On 11.01.2011 12:15, Michał Borsuk wrote: Am 11.01.2011 10:34, schrieb Claudius Henrichs: Arguments for relations in each direction: - easier to check correctness and completeness (simply select each direction's relation in JOSM) - easier to manage routes where the vehicle takes different routes and stops in each direction ...which is very rare in Europe. Can't comment on anything else in this discussion, but in the part of Northern Germany where I live, a lot of buses use different routes depending on the direction. I think the main reason is one way roads all over the place. Christian ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism
On 23.01.2011 13:18, Michał Borsuk wrote: On 01/23/2011 12:57 PM, Vincent Privat wrote: 2011/1/23 Michał Borsuk mailto:michal.bor...@gmail.com>> Could you please explain what you mean, because I'm not sure. The links provided show bus routes with nothing difficult in particular. They could be mapped as one relation each, only if bus stops are tagged correctly. I just want to be sure we can draw in OSM the exact same map as I gave as examples. That is possible with openbusmap.org (öpnvkarte.de), although there are reports of some minor problems. These examples show distincts ways taken by buses, depending on the direction. If it can be done for these simple lines just with a single relation and stops tagged correctly, it's fine for me. No, this can't be done in such detail, but it's not necessary as of 2011. All you need to know is where is the bus stop for the direction you're interested in, or whether the bus stop you found serves you correctly. All the rest is done by the routing software. Note that most modern public transport companies no longer publish bus routes as maps, because 1) they force you to use the routing software, 2) bus lines often vary throughout the day or week -> nowadays it's impossible to draw bus lines correctly. How do you put the message on OSM that "bus passes here on Sunday morning"? I'm sorry, but saying it is not necessary seems very arrogant to me. Maybe it is not necessary for what you want to use OSM for, but that doesn't mean that we can't use it for something else. Last time I checked, OSM was open and everybody was able to map whatever they wanted. Thinking about the 100+ messages about this topic, this might actually be the reason for the problems in finding a good proposal. You have an idea of what you want to do with the data and you think that everybody else wants to do the same stuff. That's not the case! People will want to use the data in different ways and that is fine, so what we need is a public transport proposal that allows everybody to map whatever they want to map. That includes people like you who only want the bus stops, but it also includes people like Vincent or me who would like to map also physical path a bus takes on the street. Christian ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Multiple tracks
I like the idea of grouping tracks and having to create only one line in the editors for 2 or more tracks. But how would this work with points/junctions? If I have tracks=2 and there is a junction where you could turn left, but only from the left track, how would that work? Also if there are two individually drawn tracks that are now parallel for some time, how would I "merge" them into one with tracks=2 and still indicate which one is which? I guess a simple solution would be to not allow any type of railway points/junctions when tracks>1, but that still leaves the problem on how to indicate multiple incoming lines that are now joint together, even if there is no way to go from one to the other and how to separate them correctly at the end of the multitrack? Christian > From: talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org > [mailto:talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of > Richard Mann > Sent: Sonntag, 21. Juni 2009 18:10 > To: osm > Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Multiple tracks > > No, simpler than that: > > tracks=1 => render a single line at all zooms > tracks=2 => render a double line at all zooms tracks=X => > render a multiple line with X tracks at all zooms tracks=1ofX > => render a single line at high zooms, but render as if > tracks=X at medium/low zooms > > and though I wouldn't particularly recommend this > complication (but there are circumstances you might want to use it): > > tracks=YofX => render as if tracks=Y at high zooms, and as if > tracks=X at medium/low zooms > > > As an example, if you've got four individual lines next to > one another, they would all be tracks=1of4. > > > 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
> On 01/24/2011 12:40 PM, Christian wrote: > > On 23.01.2011 13:18, Michał Borsuk wrote: > > >> No, this can't be done in such detail, but it's not > necessary as of > >> 2011. All you need to know is where is the bus stop for > the direction > >> you're interested in, or whether the bus stop you found serves you > >> correctly. All the rest is done by the routing software. > [...] > > I'm sorry, but saying it is not necessary seems very arrogant to me. > > Maybe it is not necessary for what you want to use OSM for, > but that > > doesn't mean that we can't use it for something else. Last time I > > checked, OSM was open and everybody was able to map > whatever they wanted. > > Not at all. Nowhere it is written that anarchy is encouraged. > If it were, I would have already applied what *I* think is > proper, instead of finding a common solution. > > If disagree then please attack my arguments with > counter-arguments. I stand by what I wrote. Well, I could agree with you that your proposal is fine for most usage cases. But below you say it yourself, the direction is lost, so for all those usage cases where people would like the direction your proposal isn't working. > > > Thinking about the 100+ messages about this topic, this > might actually > > be the reason for the problems in finding a good proposal. > > You have an idea of what you want to do with the data and you think > > that everybody else wants to do the same stuff. That's not the case! > > I am aware of this. Sometimes the minority is correct. I'm not sure if there is a right or wrong here. Its just different ways to use the data. > > > People will want to use the data in different ways and that > is fine, > > so what we need is a public transport proposal that allows > everybody > > to map whatever they want to map. That includes people like you who > > only want the bus stops, but it also includes people like > Vincent or > > me who would like to map also physical path a bus takes on > the street. > > My proposal does cover that. A simple bus line will be mapped > as it was before, with the minor exception that the route > will not contain the direction (you don't need that as a > user) - but the stops will. I have to read your proposal again, maybe I missed something. I thought your proposal wouldn't allow me to see the exact roads a bus travels on between two stops. If that is the case and the road between two stops is known with your proposal, just not the direction, how about changing/amending your proposal to add an *optional* argument or maybe a relation somewhere to store the direction? If someone wants the direction (for whatever reason) they could still be 100% compatible with your proposal but do some extra work and also get the direction - which only makes sense when the roads are different depending on the direction. Christian ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
