Re: [Talk-transit] stop_position proposal

Dear all, as a follow-up a statistic about whether highway=bus_stop is rather used on-street or off-street. The vast majority is (now) mapping bus stops off the street. The numbers vary, 99% of all bus stops in United Kingdom are mapped off street, about 80%-90% in France, Italy, and Germany.

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

stop_position is even worse for trains, which might be hundreds of meters long with dozens of doors. The wiki says to map it as the "center" of the train, but I'm not sure that's useful other than to explicitly indicate which track the train uses, which could probably be deduced from the route

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

The node doesn't describe the platform. The naming is unfortunate, but I think we're stuck with it. The node represents the stop. What stop platform way and stop_position node belongs together can be expressed using a stop_area relation. Then it's needed only once. There is no need to do it over

Re: [Talk-transit] stop_position proposal

It's not a coincidence that there are few 'failures' in Belgium. Over the years I added 70k of them and cleaned up the existing ones as I got along, maybe 1k. As I chugged along, I didn't read the wiki every time it changed and when I went to have a look in neighbouring countries, I noticed the

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Here in Belgium, we have normal buses and longer ones, either can have 2 doors or 3 doors. There is no way of knowing which of those buses is going to serve which stops at a given time. The only thing we do know for sure, is that we are supposed to get on in front, except for wheelchairs and

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

I knew this was going to be hard. Anyway, I made sure that it's definitely allowed to tag bus stops as platform nodes. Every few months I look at the wiki and each time it changes. At present it says that if a stop_position node is present for a bus stop, it has to be added to the route relations.

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Stephen wrote: > If a consumer doesn't care about stop_position members, it's trivial > to > ignore them. If the current spec says they're mandatory, then > propose > making them optional; I would support that. I don't support > prohibiting > or removing them. They are optional in the current

[Talk-transit] stop_position proposal

Dear all, there is another proposal, distinct from Polyglot's proposal that is in RFC since some days: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Drop_stop_positions_and_platforms Before I tell a personal opinion, I would like to present some related facts. The basic idea is to

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On 2018-04-16 08:11, Philip Barnes wrote: On 16 April 2018 07:46:13 BST, Jo wrote: Anyway, you're right in that the main point of my proposal is to get people to add 1 object per stop to the route relations. I think this is a good idea for bus routes as they are quite

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On 16 April 2018 07:46:13 BST, Jo wrote: > >What I hear quite often in railway stations is: don't use the last >three >'cars' if you want to get off in minor station such and so. I almost >never >hear them say, get on the train in zone A-E, but I think it is written >on