Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

On 01/06/2021 19:37, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: Why bother with OSM at all then? Just look at a Ordnance Survey map and use your sentience to find what you're looking for. OSM is free. OSM is not a database sink. DaveF ___ Talk-transit mailing

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

On 01/06/2021 18:32, Philip Barnes wrote: On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 13:07 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 12:38 Dave F via Talk-transit < talk-transit@openstreetmap.org> wrote: On 01/06/2021 16:11, Christopher Parker wrote: On 6/1/2021 10:54 AM, Dave F via Talk-transit

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

On 01/06/2021 18:07, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 12:38 Dave F via Talk-transit <mailto:talk-transit@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: On 01/06/2021 16:11, Christopher Parker wrote: > > On 6/1/2021 10:54 AM, Dave F via Talk-transit wrote:

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

ut route relations, OSM shows where you can get on the train/vehicle, but not where you can go On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 10:58 Dave F via Talk-transit <mailto:talk-transit@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: What's wrong with consulting a timetable? Maps show you where you can go, timetab

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

What's wrong with consulting a timetable? Maps show you where you can go, timetables tell you when . DaveF On 01/06/2021 01:18, Michael Tsang wrote: > I think you are missing the point that GB is not a city. > Cities are densly pack and urban transport systems reflect this. In London tube

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

For the last few years I've added/deleted & maintained Britain's railway stations. All National Rail stations (currently 2571) have the Station's 3 digit CRS code (ref:crs=*). This is the public facing code which allows routing developers to link to NR webpages which provide more *accurate*

Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] Mapping train services in Great Britain

As others have said, this data doesn't really belong in OSM. It's too transient, too complicated to maintain. GB timetables are officially updated every 6 months, but services vary on an ad-hoc basis. This previous year being a good example. How detailed would your system be? Would you adjust

Re: [Talk-transit] bus=yes opinion

public_transport=platform and  highway=bus_stop are different schemas. Please don't confuse the two. When mapping using the much more prevalent highway=bus_stop there is no requirement for bus=* as it's obviously explicit. DaveF On 11/07/2020 06:33, Agustin Rissoli wrote: What are your

Re: [Talk-transit] bus stop name

The whole point of route relations is to allow multiple routes to be added to an individual object. On 17/07/2020 02:15, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-transit wrote:     In the USA bus stops (flag stops) are located for the most part at named intersections, that is at where the street sign is.    

Re: [Talk-transit] Making bus lines more specific

On 28/04/2020 08:45, Robin Däneke wrote: Hello everybody, I have lately been thinking about somehow reworking (or giving a new push to) the current p_t:v2 scheme. Especially for the fact, that, since it was first proposed and accepted, not a lot has changed in which tags are rendered, how

Re: [Talk-transit] Long bus routes

On 02/08/2019 14:35, Janko Mihelić wrote: I think they should be mapped as relations with only stations in the relation. How would you perform real-time tracking? DaveF ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

...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'?

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

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

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

If separate signs.poles - double nodes if single sign/poles - two tags on one node DaveF On 13/05/2019 16:02, Johnparis wrote: If a platform is multimodal, highway=bus_stop fails, because the same node requires (for example) railway=tram_stop ___

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 13/05/2019 16:36, Johnparis wrote: the bus stop (platform) node allows for shelter=yes/no and bench=yes/no, so it's not really necessary to separately map them and/or group them into the stop area. If you've the time, map them separately  - it makes the database more accurate, but I still

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

I think this highlights another PT schema problem - expecting too much from a routing engine. On 13/05/2019 16:29, Philip Barnes wrote: I do, but there tend to be lots of bus stops and sometimes I want it to choose the one with the shelter if its only a short extra walk. Phil (trigpoint)

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 13/05/2019 16:14, Johnparis wrote: I don't have any particular problem with mapping an area (closed way) or a way (line segment) as a platform, Please, please only map a platform /if/ it's a physical structure. Imaginary meta-objects  don't work in OSM DaveF

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 13/05/2019 16:14, Philip Barnes wrote: I can see that when its raining I may want the router to direct me to a stop with a shelter rather than stand in the rain. Surely you need to be given the bus stop which will take you to your destination? That /is/ the point of a router. DaveF

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 13/05/2019 07:36, Tijmen Stam wrote: On 13-05-19 00:14, Jo wrote: I like to keep things simple, the best way to accomplish that, is by having a single object for each stop that holds all the details for its "lifetime". That's why I don't like the idea of 'upgrading from a node to a

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 12/05/2019 23:14, Jo wrote: About the stop_area relations, they're not needed everywhere, but they could be used to show what belongs together. Of course, that would mean all the objects related to the stop at one side of the street, not both sides. Why items "belong together"? Does a

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 12/05/2019 19:55, Tijmen Stam wrote: . No, changing of tagging, not replication. There is no need to map with highway=bus_stop anymore (save for rendering on osm_carto) No. highway=bus_stop is fully relevant as the day it was first used. It's simple, clear, comprehensible meaning far out

[Talk-transit] "more then one platform in one location"

Hi On the railway=platform wiki page there's a comment: "If there are more then one platform in one location, a relation could be used to "bind" them together. See Approved Public Transport Schema for more information."

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

For reasons I've already stated I disagree with everything in this post, but this epitomises why the public transport schema concept was a complete cock-up: I think it is suitable to go the way of unifying it as much as possible under the p_t-umbrella. * It wasn't to enable routers to

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 08/05/2019 20:56, Tijmen Stam wrote: I never understood the whole railway=platform discussion. IHMO hw=bus_stop, hw=platform and rw=platform should die, and all be replaced by public_transport=platform You fail to say why. I have updated entire public transport concessions with almost

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

2019-05-06 at 13:53 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote: On 2019-05-03 12:09, Dave F via Talk-transit wrote: On 30/04/2019 18:34, Stephen Sprunk wrote: A platform is where people wait to board; if they stand at a pole (typical for buses), then the pole is logically the platform. This reinforces my p

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 06/05/2019 19:53, Stephen Sprunk wrote: On 2019-05-03 12:09, Dave F via Talk-transit wrote: This reinforces my point about misappropriation of tags. A platform is a physical construction higher than the surrounding ground to allow easier boarding. It's a logical platform whether

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 04/05/2019 19:15, john whelan wrote: Unfortunately people make notes often on paper. So someone leading a mapping group will refer to their notes when repeating the exercise. Finding those notes and correcting them is not easy. Experience is what you get when you don't get what you

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 04/05/2019 16:01, John Whelan wrote: So can the proposal build on existing highway=bus_stop? I've yet to hear a reason why. On reason for this is a number of cites have imported their bus stops from Open Data which ensures completeness.  ie all the bus stops in the city are present and

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

cussion), Johan Wiklund Entur -Original Message- From: Dave F via Talk-transit Sent: fredag 3. mai 2019 19.09 To: Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics ; selfishseaho...@gmail.com Cc: Dave F Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 28/04/2019 17:13, DC Viennablog wrote: ...But in my opinion, as it stands, for bus or tram stops, these relations do not make that much sense. As any software should be able to find those connections between stops with the same name, the stop areas are quite redundent. Agreed Using a

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 29/04/2019 16:22, Stephen Sprunk wrote: Stop areas are supposed to link stop positions to platforms, so a router knows which platform you need to take a route that only stops on a particular track.  In most cases, this can be inferred by proximity, but in some it can't, particularly at

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

On 29/04/2019 19:39, Markus wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 17:18, Stephen Sprunk wrote: Part of what seems to have started the PTv2 mess is that bus stops were sometimes mapped on the way and sometimes beside the way, and both cases were tagged the same. PTv2 tried to separate those into

Re: [Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme

Hello General points: Are Stop_Areas required? What are they for? Are they in use?/Who uses them?/Will they ever be used?* If there is a purpose for them, what should they consist of? I've seen shops, bike racks, litter bins included. Surely they're irrelevant? Remove