Nodes can change, the tags can change, the position can change.
They are easy to work with, both for the mappers, the users and the
software.
Going from a node to a (closed)way and then having to update all the route
relations, that is cumbersome.
Having to maintain the same data across multiple
@Polyglot:
I do think you are thinking to much of software that uses the date rather than
of the mappers and the database. For both of those, it is better to habe less
objects to contend with (mapper) and less objects with potentially redundant
values/positions (database). The fact that maybe a
I believe this is intended to mean that if a named location (which could be
a railway station, bus station, metro station, tram stop or an interchange
incorporating more than one mode of transport) has more than one place
where one can board or alight from a transit vehicle, then they should all
be
For maintenance and for the stability of the data it is, however, better to
keep the object that represents the stop, the same during its lifetime,
instead of migrating it from node to way objects.
We are perfectly well capable of having a node to represent the stop with
highway=bus_stop and anoth
On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 12:31, Dave F via Talk-transit
wrote:
>
> 1) highway=bus_stop is a physical object. In OSM we map physical
> objects. To clarify - What do you mean by 'logical'?
While stops (and stations, too) can be observed (PT vehicles stop
there), they aren't physical objects. Physical
The target of OSM is to map physical objects, however, a node that is
„highway=bus_stop“ is not really a physical object. You could say it is the
station pole, but what if there is no station pole, as the schedule is mounted
on the wall of a house or inside a shelter, or just doesn‘t exist to be
...the logical object highway=bus_stop/railway=tram_stop cannot be
mapped on the same area as the physical object
highway=platform/railway=platform (as they use the same key).
1) highway=bus_stop is a physical object. In OSM we map physical
objects. To clarify - What do you mean by 'logical'?
On 13/05/2019 19:01, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 11:49, Dave F via Talk-transit
wrote:
If Philip really wants a router to tell him where the nearest
shelter (surely you can just look around you),
You're joking?!
No, I'm not. Another reason PT has got itself into such a mess
On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 17:39, Johnparis wrote:
>
> I agree that platforms should be mapped as ways only if they physically
> exist. What I'm saying is that I don't object if someone does map such an
> object, but the information from the transit agency should always be
> contained in a node, no
On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 20:55, Tijmen Stam wrote:
>
> a "public_transport=platform" is not defined as being "platform" (raised
> good concrete flooring) but as "the place where people wait to board a
> bus/tram/train". Whatever form that is.
That's a contradiction of the PTv2 scheme: it says that
10 matches
Mail list logo
