Re: [Talk-transit] Tagging a public transport route which uses buses and trams simultaneously

If the itineraries between the stops are all the same, I would probably map it as route=tram and consider the buses replacement service. Why do they do that? Are there too few tram vehicles? Not enough tram wattman? Are the trams too big/costly at some hours of the day? Polyglot On Mon, Oct

Re: [Talk-transit] Talk-transit Digest, Vol 104, Issue 1

Number of seats may work. But it would have to be a ballpark figure. Over here in Belgium, the same line uses bendy and normal buses depending on the hour of the day, or on what they have available at that specific time. On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 14:09 Tony Shield wrote: > Hi Alex > > Michael Tsang

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus routes in Málaga: Should we add "stop_area" relations?

Hi Daniel, If you would like to participate in a Hangout, I can explain to you how PT_Assistant can help you with this task. We can even do that in Spanish, si te gusta. Personally, I would also only map highway=bus_stop (with or without public_transport=platform) on nodes next to the highway,

Re: [Talk-transit] bus=yes opinion

Let's go back to 2012. An attempt was made to solve a 'problem' and the 'new' model for mapping public transport was proposed. Some people were mapping stops on the rail/highway, others were mapping them next to the highway. For rail, and especially if you have only a single OSM way to represent

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

_stop but still do the > same thing functionally) and other points could be put in there. > Maybe we actually end up with a useful consensus, that one could propose. > > The more people get on board, the more acceptable it can become... > > KR > RobinD > > Am 28.04.2020 um 10:

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

For years and years we have tried to convince the people working on carto, our default rendering to start supporting public_transport=platform/bus=yes instead of highway=bus_stop. They have clearly stated that this will never happen. Conclusion: highway=bus_stop is NOT a legacy tag. That's my

Re: [Talk-transit] Real time information

For the stops that I have in mind, the url with the real time information is the only site I will want to link to, so the tag 'url' would do just fine. If there is an additional website for that particular stop, we could use 'website'. The advantage is that all tools already work with this tag.

[Talk-transit] Mapping bus lines in Zambia using JOSM's PT_Assistant plugin

Hi, Tonight at 21:00 CEST I'll do a hangout where we'll map or correct some bus lines in Zambia. Let me know if you are interested, then I'll invite you 5 minutes before it starts. Jo (Polyglot) ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit

Re: [Talk-transit] Public transport validator+generator from Maps.Me

Here in Flanders, Belgium we have some market (single day/week) and school (only 1 or 2 trips/day) buses and also some lines with a circular pattern that only have a single route relation in the route_master relation. It's unusual, but it's not wrong. Let me know if you need examples. Jo On Tue

Re: [Talk-transit] Adding highway=bus_stop to nodes with public transport=platform bus=yes

I think it's standard practice to add highway=bus_stop to nodes for bus stops, as they won't render otherwise anyway. I don't see parrticular need to ask for permission to add it, but if you do, you have my vote to add it. I'm starting to have a tendency to move away from

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

field, than it would stay a > „platform“-node for it‘s lifetime. Objective achieved. > > KR > RobinD (emergency99) > -- > *Von:* Jo > *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 14. Mai 2019 14:37:39 > *An:* Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topic

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

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

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

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 'upgradin

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

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 way/area or a relation. So a node next to the highway per stop. I started

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

> greater use for a relation than just telling within the database that one > thing belongs to another that is right next to it... > > And if required, the deletion/retagging of > stop_position/bus_stop/(tram_stop) nodes in areas where > "platform"-nodes/ways exist could be

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

I have been holding off to respond to this. Almost a decade ago I started asking for public_transport=platform combined with bus=yes to be rendered, so it would become possible to drop highway=bus_stop. After all those years it has become obvious that there is no willingness to do so. So it makes

Re: [Talk-transit] Help with bus route consisting of a round trip

This summer it will see an additional improvement for routes with loops/spoons if the GSoC project gets accepted. Jo On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:10 AM seirra wrote: > (replied to using a backup because my other email is currently down) I > find the automatic sort button in the relations

Re: [Talk-transit] Help with bus route consisting of a round trip

I removed two ways from the relation. One where there are 2 parallel ones, but only one of those can serve that stop. The other was a part that I deleted as well. It was probably the result from a split that went bad. Jo On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 1:05 AM David Suárez wrote: > Yes, I'm us

Re: [Talk-transit] Help with bus route consisting of a round trip

Hola David, Now it's continuous. Do you know about the PT_Assistant plugin? Jo On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:57 PM David Suárez wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to improve public transport route in my city following the > PTv2 scheme. However, I get a validation warning regarding t

[Talk-transit] identifier in ref:xOperatorx=y0yyyy to url=http://mijnlijn.be/y0yyyy

Our bus stops in Flanders have unique identifiers visible to the public on the flags of the stop poles. I started by entering those in the ref tag, then later decided to use ref:De_Lijn=y0, as some of those stops are served by other operators as well. For several years now itt's possible to

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

be > asking those existing OSM routing people what is their preferred way to > store timetable data that can be updated reliably. > > Here in the UK timetable data is in the public domain - is that the case > in other places? > > TonyS > > > > On 06/11/2018 19:5

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

(started writing this several hours ago) The way this proposal is evolving, there will be 2 versions. One that gives an approximate idea of how much time there is between 2 buses for a given time of day/day of week. Those can be added as tags on the route relations. That one should not be

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Great to hear that. when I get back home I'll further elaborate on the spreadsheet idea. Now with a full timetable for one general direction of travel On Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 13:59 Tony Shield Hi Jo > > I've looked at your proposal and I'm starting to understand it and like it. > > I lo

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Hi Tony, Could you also have a look at the proposal I created? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_timetables At the moment I'm looking into how to represent that in meaningful ways using MapCSS in JOSM, but I don't think that makes too much sense. For your

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

. Jo Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 20:22 schreef djakk djakk : > Ok I see. > > I am still a bit reluctant to your proposal since the travelling time > between 2 stops can vary during the day, especially for train routes. > Ok there is the possibility of adding a new timetable relation ...

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

nightmare. The way I proposed it, suffers less from that problem. When timetables change it's usually that trips are added or removed or their start time changes slightly. The time to get from one stop to the next will remain constant, most of the time. Jo Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 18:40 schreef djakk

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

>>> osm (except an osm mapper really wants to put it into osm, knowing per >>> habits the schedule). >>> >>> >>> Julien « djakk » >>> >>> >>> >>> Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:28, Jo a écrit : >>> >>>>

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Hi Leif, You made me do it! :-) I sort of stole your proposal and started creating a new one. It differs in rather important ways from your proposal, so I preferred not modifying your wiki page. I also think it's important to decouple the (voting for a) full timetable solution from the solution

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus Service - Route - end of life

Hi Tony, At the moment we don't have anything in place to do that. When itineraries disappear, their corresponding route relations are deleted. When entire lines disappear their route_master and route relations are deleted. If they are renamed and/or their identifier changes and it's obvious that

[Talk-transit] PT_Assistant new functionality to add itineraries more conveniently

It should become available for everyone in about 2 weeks. If you want to help with beta testing, contact me and I'll send you a script to start up JOSM-latest + download the development version of PT_Assistant on Linux. Jo ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk

Re: [Talk-transit] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

oh, in case stop_area relations are added, it makes sense to duplicate the name of the stop on them. Op do 26 jul. 2018 om 12:38 schreef Jo : > Way 0: > > node next to highway/railway > hw=bus_stop/rw=tram_stop > pt=plaform > bus=yes > tram=yes > name &g

Re: [Talk-transit] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

, but has more redundance, Way 2 is closer to > a good database, but more load on the editors. > > -- > > > I think it would be time for a think-tank and following proposal of some > sort to ammend the p_t:v2 to a "simpler to edit" and "to d

Re: [Talk-transit] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

For me the fact that highway=bus_stop is only allowed on nodes is a plus, not a minus. The reason why I would like us all to use nodes for representing the stops is that a route relation with a single node for each stop and then a continuous linked string of ways is conceptually about as simple

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Transport mode on platforms? (Was: Re: Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes)

Very soon after PTv2 was 'accepted' I understood that if we would ever replace hw=bus_stop NODES with pt=platform, the mode of transport would need to be added on these nodes. Ever since it's a back and forth pulling between yes the mode of transport can be added on them and NO the platforms

Re: [Talk-transit] [Imports] [OSM-talk] Automated edit for bus lines in Paris area

A tool to help with this kind of integration is being developed as a Google Summer of Code project. It's in early stages and focused on GTFS feeds, but we can look into doing this for lists of stops with approximate coordinates as well. Polyglot Op di 5 jun. 2018 om 08:59 schreef Stefan de

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

the wiki, gave up. Let the 'specialists' handle it. I'll continue working on PT_Assistant and of course I'll try to make it work for simple and complex ways of mapping alike. Polyglot 2018-04-16 20:51 GMT+02:00 Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org>: > Jo, > > IMHO, if a stop_

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

there are zones on the platforms, those we can map by splitting those platforms. Jo 2018-04-16 20:17 GMT+02:00 Ed Loach <edlo...@gmail.com>: > Stephen wrote: > > If a consumer doesn't care about stop_position members, it's trivial > > to > > ignore them. If the current

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

perfectly possible to tag it with highway=platform or railway=platform and optionally tactile_paving=yes wheelchair=yes/limited/no Jo 2018-04-16 19:17 GMT+02:00 Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org>: > On 2018-04-16 08:11, Philip Barnes wrote: > >> On 16 April 2018 07:46

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

A few years ago it was meant as a way to comply with the PT v2 scheme. For me a nice side effect is/was that JOSM assigns a platform role automatically when adding them to route and stop_area relations. But it wouldn't be hard to reprogram it to do that for simply

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

ope, based on what is described in the wiki is overly complex, thus making it only for "experts", and we don't have enough of those. Polyglot 2018-04-11 19:38 GMT+02:00 Roland Hieber <li...@rohieb.name>: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:19:32PM +0200, Jo wrote: > > Here goes my prop

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

2018-04-10 16:23 GMT+02:00 Stephen Sprunk : > But for the thousands of platform ways/areas that do already exist, you're > proposing that someone has to go back and add nodes, move all the tags > over, change which is the relation member, etc.? That's not very friendly. > You

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

. The node REPRESENTING the stop keeps fulfilling this function for the lifetime of the stop's 'existence'. Jo 2018-04-10 2:43 GMT+02:00 Bill Ricker <bill.n1...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here goes my proposal for a ref

Re: [Talk-transit] Uploading public transport data on OSM

gt; Routes appear simpler to deal with since they're unique to each operator, > but they're inherently built on top of stops (or stop_areas), so they may > present new problems when we get there. > > S > > > On 2018-01-16 14:35, Jo wrote: > > Is there a common pattern to these GTF

Re: [Talk-transit] Uploading public transport data on OSM

Is there a common pattern to these GTFS IDs? Are they guaranteed to be unique across operators? Or is that not important and is it only important that they are stable between versions of GTFS files for a region? Adding a ref:gtfs tag would not be very hard to do, but I would prefer a scheme with

Re: [Talk-transit] Uploading public transport data on OSM

Hi, the very first question that comes to mind is: is it under a suitable license, or can you get explicit permission from the operator to contribute it to OpenStreetMap? The next issue is that there is no direct way to add GTFS to OSM. stops.txt can be converted to nodes for the stops, but the

[Talk-transit] Hangouts on Air Screencast on public transport

Hi, I'd like to regularly do Webinar meetings on mapping public transport mapping in OpenStreetmap using JOSM. The first one will be at 8pm CEST next Tuesday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTiiR7tjpcU Polyglot ___ Talk-transit mailing list

[Talk-transit] Google Summer of Code 2017 JOSM PT_Assistant plugin

Giacomo Servadei was accepted for continuing development on the JOSM PT_Assistant plugin. Darya Golovko started to work on this plugin last year and she succeeded in making the mapping and correcting of public transport route relations a lot more convenient and efficient. She will be

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

2016-10-30 21:27 GMT+01:00 Greg Troxel : > > Felix Delattre writes: > > > There are different concepts of routes in OpenStreetMap and GTFS. > > Sometimes they are not existent or ambiguous. > > I am a native speaker of en_US. > > > 1. A general public

Re: [Talk-transit] Public Transport Mapping Party (3. Sep. 10:30h in Bremen, Germany)

Hi Raffael, I hope you are aware of the public transport plugin for JOSM created by Darya Golovko, as part of GSoC. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/PT_Assistant 2016-08-30 7:05 GMT+02:00 Rittmeier, Raffael : > Hello everyone. > > The OpenStreetMap User Group

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

> 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 p

Re: [Talk-transit] GTFS, tools and pt tags generally

Darya (a GsoC student) is actually working on a project to help with the routing. We haven't included conversion from GTFS and I'm not sure there will be time for that. What's most time consuming, especially because of changes/breakings caused by other mappers and PT itineraries subject to change,

Re: [Talk-transit] different interpretations of v2 PT scheme

to the route relation. Anyway, I wouldn't try to abolish stop_area relations, but rather make sure that SA relations can be grouped together into stop_area_group relations. This makes sense for bus stations where the separate stop_area relations will have names with numbers or letters after them. Jo 2015

Re: [Talk-transit] different interpretations of v2 PT scheme

2015-07-01 10:00 GMT+02:00 Éric Gillet gill3t.3ric+...@gmail.com: 2015-07-01 7:38 GMT+02:00 Jo winfi...@gmail.com: In retrospect public_transport=platform was a misnomer. Maybe we should have used public_transport=pole. A platform can be a pole, or a shelter, or a dock, or a boarding

Re: [Talk-transit] different interpretations of v2 PT scheme

sides of a street. Jo 2015-07-01 11:43 GMT+02:00 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com: Your processing needs to be able to cope with these situations, using the latlon of the features, if the relationships aren't explicit. Get the computer to do the work, not the mappers. Richard

Re: [Talk-transit] different interpretations of v2 PT scheme

is needed for each side of a street? and a stop_area_group to show that they belong together? Jo 2015-07-02 0:31 GMT+02:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com: To me it's logical to put all those ref, network and operator tags in the stop_area relation, not on the nodes or ways. The relation

[Talk-transit] validator rule for public_transport=platform

Hi, I'm getting messages from the validator claiming public_transport=platform can only be used on way or closed_way. This is not true. It can be used perfectly well on nodes. In that case the node represents the position of the pole. I just checked it on the wiki.

Re: [Talk-transit] validator rule for public_transport=platform

:13, Jo wrote: I'm getting messages from the validator claiming public_transport=platform can only be used on way or closed_way. This is not true. It can be used perfectly well on nodes. In that case the node represents the position of the pole. A platform is not a pole... I just checked

Re: [Talk-transit] validator rule for public_transport=platform

to way breaks the continuity of the history. There is no practical way to know what (deleted) node the new platform way was based on. Polyglot 2015-05-07 11:26 GMT+02:00 Nounours77 kuessemondtaegl...@gmail.com: On 2015-05-07 10:13, Jo wrote: I'm getting messages from the validator claiming

Re: [Talk-transit] Mapping bus routes with doglegs and loops

split ways, although I think JOSM gets that right without them already. A bigger problem is people joining ways, which results in stumps that are not connected to the next way anymore. And of course, deleting ways, potentially replacing them by new ones. Jo 2015-02-22 6:10 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson

Re: [Talk-transit] Mapping bus routes with doglegs and loops

ba...@ursamundi.org: On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Paul, It helps, when you select a subset of ways and only let JOSM sort those automatically. True, but if you've had to edit a section of a dogleg to add another, sub dogleg, this breaks, too

Re: [Talk-transit] Mapping bus routes with doglegs and loops

Hi Paul, It helps, when you select a subset of ways and only let JOSM sort those automatically. Can you select one of the relations, then do Ctrl-Shft-h, then copy that url. Jo 2015-02-21 21:12 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: Is there an easy way to map these? In JOSM, I run

Re: [Talk-transit] Information board details in bus stops

On talk-be we were wondering what strip means. Jo On Aug 21, 2014 3:32 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, How would you tag an information board in a bus stop and mainly, if there is a timetable, map, etc. This picture on twitter suggests new tags: https://pbs.twimg.com/media

Re: [Talk-transit] Information board details in bus stops

In Belgium the letters B U S are painted on the asphalt. Hence we wouldn't call that strip, markings maybe. Jo On Aug 21, 2014 5:08 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: On talk-be we were wondering what strip means. Good question

Re: [Talk-transit] Stop according to new PT scheme not rendered?

even have tram lines rendered. We need outside help with this :) Janko 2014-08-12 0:55 GMT+02:00 Jo winfi...@gmail.com: Now that the new way of rendering with Carto instead of Mapnik is finally becoming reality, it becomes clear that highway=bus_stop will never (or at least not during my

Re: [Talk-transit] Stop according to new PT scheme not rendered?

richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com: tag-transform is an osmosis plugin. It happens before conversion to the postgres database, so you can use any tags that exist in the wild On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: For a long time, public_transport was not transfered

Re: [Talk-transit] One way multiple times in bus relation

In that case 1 relation is enough to describe the route. It will contain some ways twice. No roles are needed on the ways. The order of the ways in the relation matters. In JOSM you will see double vertical line next to your ways when you're done. The first and the last ways will close the loop

Re: [Talk-transit] a little idea for new public transport shema

Since I'm the one who proposed this initially, I'm going to add some more detail. Stops on opposing sides of a street are hardly ever, exactly opposite one another, so usually there are 2 stop_positions. This means there will usually be pairs of route_segment relations, one for each direction.

Re: [Talk-transit] Close stations having the same name

The addition of the (bus/tram) platform and its number are what is visible on the ground (and in the data of the PT provider). Jo 2013/12/19 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com Naming them different than they are named on the ground is mapping for the renderer. Just add train=yes, bus=yes

Re: [Talk-transit] Close stations having the same name

think it's better to indicate they are related by a hierarchy of stop_area relations. Jo 2013/12/18 Copro Grammes coprogram...@yahoo.fr Hi, Close to a main railway station, there are often other stations (underground, bus, tram, etc.) which have the same name (e.g. Somewhere Station). I

Re: [Talk-transit] Stop according to new PT scheme not rendered?

I went with the pragmatic solution, after being rebuffed several times. You're not the first one who brings this up. :-) It doesn't seem like there is a willingness to support the new scheme, which leads me to say: ok, then it's not necessary to add the new tags, so I don't. Then the rest of the

Re: [Talk-transit] Stop according to new PT scheme not rendered?

The point would be that it then becomes possible to leave out highway=bus_stop by contributors who want to do that, thus opening the possibility to migrate towards the new scheme. Jo 2013/12/11 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com Simply rendering public_transport=platform+bus=yes

[Talk-transit] Using route part relations in Route relations

Hi, I mapped all the PT going through my city during the past years. There are many common parts to these itineraries and it's cumbersome to have to mend them one by one on a regular basis. It would be a lot easier if it were possible to create route part relations, for example from one stop to

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus route relation finished. Do you have comments for it? relation/29780

Hi Niklas, Signomi for the nodes I moved. I tossed away that useless mouse... Were you able to look at the bus route relations running through my home town? Cheers, Jo 2012/4/16 Niklas Cholmkvist towards...@gmail.com Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: Something odd is going on with this one

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus route relation finished. Do you have comments for it? relation/29780

Hi, I created a new relation for one direction of this bus route: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2139143 You can either delete it, or change the relation you created to reflect the other direction of the route. Polyglot 2012/4/15 Niklas Cholmkvist towards...@gmail.com Hello

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus route relation finished. Do you have comments for it? relation/29780

Something odd is going on with this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1673963816/history It's very far from its stop position. In the new relation I created the way members don't need roles anymore and the stops can simply have stop as a role. Creating two relations seems like a

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus route relation finished. Do you have comments for it? relation/29780

I'm pretty sure I could write a Jython script which does exactly that, but if one can do that, then what's the point? Polyglot 2012/4/16 Mike N nice...@att.net On 4/16/2012 4:54 PM, Jo wrote: The reverse directions should be easy to find. I haven't added stop positions (yet

Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature

to serve the stop, then passes the road it came from, then exits to the right.) Jo 2011/2/9 Michał Borsuk michal.bor...@gmail.com: On 02/02/2011 02:42 PM, Jo wrote: Is it possible to add a way to a relation twice with Potlatch? Out of 80 lines I manage, I have such a situation once (not a way

Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature

2011/2/2 Michał Borsuk michal.bor...@gmail.com: On 01/28/2011 02:45 PM, Jo wrote:    Yes that's one option. I'm a bit reluctant to put in separate    relations for each direction unless someone actually gives me a    compelling reason to do so. I already have some ways with more than 20

Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature

point round the loop. I think you need to suggest either one or the other or say that both are acceptable as long as they are ordered. You look at the schedule for that line and determine which one is considered the terminus by the PT company. Jo

Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature

in both relations. Jo ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature

relation (semi-automatically if somebody codes it). We have quite a few express buses here that only stop at some of the stops they pass by. And then there are the school and marketbuses which might not even get route relations because they only run once a day/week. Jo 2011/1/27 Michael von Glasow

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposed Feature - 2nd RFC - Public Transport

For the record: I prefer to have one relation for each direction of the bus route, as this allows to indicate 'exactly' where the buses pass. We are not mapping merely for the ability to draw a map of the bus routes, but also to allow PT routing eventually. Jo 2011/1/11 Michał Borsuk michal.bor

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposed Feature - RFC - Public Transport

to maintain them in the long run. But I see why we would do it that way. Maybe I'll come up with a proposal for 'proto-relations' made up of other 'routepart'-relations some time. Those could get converted to the massively duplicated relations automatically then. Cheers, Jo 2010/12/13 Richard Mann

Re: [Talk-transit] child relations in type=route, route=bus

there is something to say for it, since so many bus lines are using the parts of the same routes, but I'm pretty sure that if one gets the PT companies to share their data, it's not going to be in there with child relations. So I'll probably be deleting them once again, soon. Jo 2010/9/29 Michał

[Talk-transit] bus stops/platforms with electronic display of when the buses pass through

in train stations and airports). That one may even deserve its own node to indicate where it is and possibly even an indication in what direction it's facing. Jo ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org