On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 12:26:40AM +, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I believe that some of your suggestions for tags seem to be
> superfluous to the way that some of the data will be structured.
> I'm also all for keeping the tags as close to the standard OSM tagging
> scheme as possible, for example, u
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:11:00AM +, Brian Prangle wrote:
> 3. If we can agree the entire tagging and import scheme would we get any
> extra benefit from offering it for discussion on talkgb or should we just
> get on with it?
I think talk-transit is the place to discuss this, but a reminder
2009/3/1 Thomas Wood :
> 2009/2/28 Brian Prangle :
> In other news, whilst on the train to (and from) York today, I wrote a
> sizable chunk of the StopArea code for the converter. It's in a mostly
> working state, the only issues I have to work out are StopArea
> hierarchies, particularly when a St
2009/2/28 Brian Prangle :
> Hi All
>
> I've added to Thomas's initial work and completed what I think we should
> import and what the tagging scheme should look like in
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Tag_mappings. Please take a look
> and shoot down in flames/agree/amend: particularly
Brian
Stoptype HAR has sub-records which contain two pairs of coordinates, one
representing the entry point to the linear footprint, and the other
representing the exit point. If guidance has been followed, then the linear
footprint should stay on a road link with the same name along its length
(
Hi All
I've added to Thomas's initial work and completed what I think we should
import and what the tagging scheme should look like in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Tag_mappings. Please take a look
and shoot down in flames/agree/amend: particularly inclusion/exclusion
proposals
Gener
