Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Bus routes forward/backward

[Michael Tsang]

I always separate those platforms into connected halves (sharing same nodes) 
because they have different refs:


?12?34?


Are your platforms really called A and B with tracks on both sides in your 
case? For example, if the timetable tells you to board at platform B and there 
is a train on both tracks, which do you board?


Michael


Sent from Outlook.com



From: Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org>
Sent: 01 November 2016 02:37
To: winfi...@gmail.com; Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics
Cc: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Bus routes forward/backward


Polyglot,

Just noting the platform may sometimes not be specific enough, however, which I 
suspect is why stop_positions exist.

Keep in mind that platforms may serve multiple tracks.  For instance, there are 
a few stations here configured like this:

?A?B?

The "regular" trains (which run the full line, every N minutes) stop on the 
outside tracks while the "peak" or "express" trains (which run part of the 
line, but only certain hours) stop on the middle track.  Telling someone to 
take the next train from a given platform could easily send them in the wrong 
direction.

Other, similar-looking stations are set up like this:

?A?B?

All the trains on the left track are going to downtown, but the trains on the 
middle and right track are going to different suburbs; telling someone to take 
the next train from a given platform could easily send them to the wrong place 
and also loses cross-platform transfers from the left track to middle track, 
which might result in a missed train if someone (especially with limited 
mobility) had to take the stairs/elevator twice to get from platform A to B.

Also, short trains may stop in different places along the platform--including 
multiple trains stopping there at the same time at peak hours, while others 
take the entire platform.

So, by not marking the stop_position, one loses valuable information and 
disserves users.


___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Bus routes forward/backward

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Hans De Kryger 
wrote:

> If i remove the forward/backward tag on a section of a way (part of the
> bus route) does that signify the bus goes both ways?
>

I would advise against this; and instead use a separate relation for each
direction of a route as it greatly simplifies maintenance of the route.
___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Bus routes forward/backward

[Jo]

Hi Hans,

Yes, that describes version 2. It's the currently used version, so version
1 route relations should be converted to several version 2 route relations,
one for each variant of the line.

There are a few things I don't agree with on that wiki page, like including
all the stop_positions to each and every route relation. I prefer to keep
things simple and only add all the platform nodes in the correct order to
the route relations. (This doesn't work in places where the details for the
stops are being added to the stop_position nodes).

Relating stop_positions to platforms (and shelters, waste_baskets, benches)
is better done using stop_area relations. But there too, my preference is
to create one such stop_area relation per direction of travel. If it's  not
done that way, those stop_area relations don't fulfill the purpose I have
for them, which is to relate platform nodes to corresponding ways via the
stop_position nodes.

Since life is too short, we need a scheme that is as simple as possible and
we need automation. I'm taking care of the second part. Of course, we make
sure that it works with whatever scheme people want to use. It's mostly
designed to fix problems with routing, making sure they are continuous,
don't travel against one way traffic or over unsuitable highways/railways.

Polyglot


2016-07-11 10:45 GMT+04:00 Hans De Kryger :

>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport#Route
>
> Is version 2?
>
> *Regards,*
>
> *Hans*
>
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Hans De Kryger <
> hans.dekryge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Jo,
>>
>> Is there agreement on the forward/backward roles in PT2? By that i mean
>> completely phasing them out. Or is it still an open discussion?​ I won't
>> add them anymore if the point is to phase them out.
>>
>> *Regards,*
>>
>> *Hans*
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Jo  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hans,
>>>
>>> The semantics depend on public_transport:version.
>>>
>>> If 1 then yes.
>>> If 2 there should be no forward/backward roles anymore.
>>>
>>> Instead you add an ordered sequence of ways that is continuous.
>>>
>>> If you want a demo of how to map PT, we can do a hangout.
>>>
>>> Also, have a look at this:
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Polyglot/diary/38980#comment35201
>>>
>>> Mapping public transport should become a lot more convenient by the time
>>> that GSoC project finishes.
>>>
>>> Polyglot
>>>
>>> 2016-07-11 10:08 GMT+04:00 Hans De Kryger :
>>>
 If i remove the forward/backward tag on a section of a way (part of the
 bus route) does that signify the bus goes both ways?

 *Regards,*

 *Hans*

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 tagg...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> tagg...@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>
>
___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit