Michał Borsuk gmail.com> writes:
> > 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, but
> a bus stop, actually). Is it an issue in your area?
Such route existed in Prague (#212), but was eliminated about one
On 09.02.2011 23:18, Michał Borsuk wrote:
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, but
a bus stop, actually). Is it an issue in your area?
Out of the top of my head I
Here the buses travel over the same stretch of asphalt quite often.
Usually back and forth (what you call a spoon). Sometimes twice in the
same direction (on a roundabout with one stop that serves both
directions, so the bus that would exit the roundabout on the first
exit, now goes around to serve
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, but
a bus stop, actually). Is it an issue in your area?
LMB
___
Talk-transit m
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Jo wrote:
> Is it possible to add a way to a relation twice with Potlatch? And is
> it possible to show that 1 way is part of a relation multiple times?
Yes. Oxford Bus route 9 now has a certain section of the Green Road
roundabout twice.
Richard
2011/2/2 Michał Borsuk :
> 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
>> relations, and
Is it possible to add a way to a relation twice with Potlatch? And is
it possible to show that 1 way is part of a relation multiple times?
In JOSM, I noticed such ways are shown in red. This is important for
routes that double back on themselves. (Of course, only if one route
is used per direction
Potlatch 2 includes a display of the ways/nodes in order, and you can
move them about, but it doesn't currently tell you anything about the
member, except the id and the role (so it's pretty much a list of
random numbers).
I've raised a ticket requesting at least the member's name to be
displayed,
On 01/28/2011 07:26 PM, Michael von Glasow wrote:
On 01/28/2011 11:59 AM, Richard Mann wrote:
As I said in my previous post, I'm open to discussing that, though I
personally find tram stops beside the way are more consistent with bus
stops.
That, plus one data point for two geographical locatio
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
relations, and I don't really want to double that
On 01/28/2011 01:16 PM, Richard Mann wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jo wrote:
You look at the schedule for that line and determine which one is considered
the terminus by the PT company.
Yes that's one option.
I've implemented it.
I'm a bit reluctant to put in separate
relations
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Jo wrote:
>> 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
>> relations, and I don't really want to double that number without good
On 01/28/2011 11:59 AM, Richard Mann wrote:
1) How do you envisage the mapping of loops (ie (say) six stops on
one-way loop at one end of the route). I guess the two directions
could be combined, or an arbitrary break made at some point round the
loop. I think you need to suggest either one or th
On 01/28/2011 09:05 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote:
On 27.01.2011 22:06, Michael von Glasow wrote:
You can find the proposal at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simplified_Public_Transport_Scheme
Constructive feedback and suggestions are welcome and can be sent to the
>
> 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
> relations, and I don't really want to double that number without good
> reason.
>
http://ww
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jo wrote:
> 2011/1/28 Richard Mann
>> 1) How do you envisage the mapping of loops (ie (say) six stops on
>> one-way loop at one end of the route). I guess the two directions
>> could be combined, or an arbitrary break made at some point round the
>> loop. I think
On Friday 28 January 2011 09:05:44 Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote:
> It seams to me, this proposal is a sipmlified version of my proposal
> with the following key features:
>
> Used well known tags for stops (also possible with mine).
> Stop area left away (also possible with mine).
> One relation pe
2011/1/28 Richard Mann
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Michael von Glasow
> wrote:
> > Following the call for a better proposal, Tiziano, Oscar and I have
> drafted
> > up a simple proposal. It is based on how we have mapped the public
> transport
> > networks in our cities (Padova, Ferrara a
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Michael von Glasow
wrote:
> Following the call for a better proposal, Tiziano, Oscar and I have drafted
> up a simple proposal. It is based on how we have mapped the public transport
> networks in our cities (Padova, Ferrara and Milan), with some improvements
> tha
On 27.01.2011 22:06, Michael von Glasow wrote:
You can find the proposal at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simplified_Public_Transport_Scheme
Constructive feedback and suggestions are welcome and can be sent to the
list or left on the proposal's discussion page.
It seam
On 01/27/2011 11:37 PM, Jo wrote:
route_ref does not seem obsolete to me. True, if the relation is
defined, it can be determined from that by routers. But as long as
that hasn't happened, this is the information that a mapper can take
not of in the field.
That's basically what I meant - you don
route_ref does not seem obsolete to me. True, if the relation is defined, it
can be determined from that by routers. But as long as that hasn't happened,
this is the information that a mapper can take not of in the field.
Then afterwards, it can help to add the appropriate stops to the route
relat
Following the call for a better proposal, Tiziano, Oscar and I have
drafted up a simple proposal. It is based on how we have mapped the
public transport networks in our cities (Padova, Ferrara and Milan),
with some improvements that came up during this discussion.
Our approach was to keep it s
On 23.01.2011 15:01, Michał Borsuk wrote:
Any updates from the wiki front?
I have started something:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Cleanup/Public_transport
I'll need your help with this, so feel free to edit and discuss.
cheers
ant
___
On 01/16/2011 10:54 PM, ant wrote:
On 15.01.2011 14:46, Michał Borsuk wrote:
Yes! I've been raising this issue here, it may have died among other
arguments: An overhaul and update of the documentation is more important
than pushing the new schema.
Do you have the resources to lead this project
On 15.01.2011 14:46, Michał Borsuk wrote:
Yes! I've been raising this issue here, it may have died among other
arguments: An overhaul and update of the documentation is more important
than pushing the new schema.
Do you have the resources to lead this project of cleaning the mess with
wiki pages
On 14 January 2011 18:53, ant wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 14.01.2011 13:30, Michał Borsuk wrote:
>
>> Even invariant lines become challenging for beginners, because the
>>> concept of forward and backward roles is really difficult to grasp.
>>>
>> I may have got it wrong, but on a simple line from A to
Hi,
On 15.01.2011 02:20, David Peek wrote:
...Also, it is quite unlikely that a stop is served in only one direction
whereas the road it resides on is used in both. For stops that are situated
at a segment that is served only in one direction, it is clear in what
direction the stop is used, isn'
> ...Also, it is quite unlikely that a stop is served in only one direction
> whereas the road it resides on is used in both. For stops that are situated
> at a segment that is served only in one direction, it is clear in what
> direction the stop is used, isn't it..
Actually, this is not unlikel
On 14.01.2011 21:28, Michał Borsuk wrote:
I will elaborate on the complexity of timetable datasets, with actual
examples, if time permits. One question here, are you developing this
software as an academic assignment? If so, in which journal would you like
to publish?
Are you addressing me? I'm
On 14 January 2011 18:56, ant wrote:
> On 14.01.2011 14:29, Richard Mann wrote:
>
>> If I were ever to map it, I'd put it in as a separate relation and put
>> days of operation in the two variants (do we have a tag for that?). I
>>
>
> I've seen people use "opening_hours" on route relations.
Wr
On 14.01.2011 21:13, Michał Borsuk wrote:
3. lack of the need in the majority of cases (other cases: roles should
be enough*)
See my other posts.
Frankly not sure which one. Do you care to summarize what you mean?
I had my posting from 18:53 CET in mind, it's about getting a platform's
dir
On 01/14/2011 07:22 PM, ant wrote:
Sorry for flooding this list.
On 14.01.2011 13:30, Michał Borsuk wrote:
What's wrong with multiple, non-nested relations? - I'm not saying we
need a route master.
1. weak point in case of rerouting: a beginner may move only one route;
more work
How often do
Richard Mann wrote:
Michał Borsuk wrote:
Again, how do you copy a route in Potlatch?
The hard way - click on each way and copy relation memberships from
the previous way. And then sort out relations/roles you've copied by
mistake. I sure hope that gets fixed in P2.
1. Click a member of the
On Friday 14 January 2011 12:46:44 ant wrote:
> Finally, that sounds much more like positive criticism :)
> By the way, thanks Michał, for pointing out details of the routing
> techniques that I obviously got wrong. Now let's see how we can tackle
> the issues we have.
Proposal finished.
This has
Sorry for flooding this list.
On 14.01.2011 13:30, Michał Borsuk wrote:
What's wrong with multiple, non-nested relations? - I'm not saying we
need a route master.
1. weak point in case of rerouting: a beginner may move only one route;
more work
How often does a PT route get rerouted compared
On 14.01.2011 14:29, Richard Mann wrote:
I think one relation for both directions is reasonably achievable and
simple (assuming P2 will allow a way to be a member at two positions
in the ordered list). This will allow many routes to be one service /
one relation.
Relations that don't work if th
On 14.01.2011 14:29, Richard Mann wrote:
If I were ever to map it, I'd put it in as a separate relation and put
days of operation in the two variants (do we have a tag for that?). I
I've seen people use "opening_hours" on route relations.
might also want a tag on the relation such as
operatio
Hi,
On 14.01.2011 13:30, Michał Borsuk wrote:
Even invariant lines become challenging for beginners, because the
concept of forward and backward roles is really difficult to grasp.
I may have got it wrong, but on a simple line from A to B, with
bus_stops serviced in both directions (a good majo
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Michał Borsuk wrote:
> But if this IS really an issue, how about treating tram where it doesn't
> have a right of was as a bus, and where it operates on separate track, as a
> train? This will be confusing to new users IF they don't read the manual
> (they will se
Am 14.01.2011 12:46, schrieb ant:
Hi,
On 14.01.2011 09:58, Michał Borsuk wrote:
How about you, and the few of us who understand why the proposal is a
mere nonsense, develop a better proposal? We seem to share the
understanding of the flaws; a new proposal may lead to a secession,
which is the u
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:46 AM, ant wrote:
> Example: If a housenumber is located exactly on the corner of two
> streets (and no street name attached to it), an algorithm could only guess
> which street it belongs to. Probably similar ambiguities are possible for
> bus stops as well (even if onl
Hi,
On 14.01.2011 09:58, Michał Borsuk wrote:
How about you, and the few of us who understand why the proposal is a
mere nonsense, develop a better proposal? We seem to share the
understanding of the flaws; a new proposal may lead to a secession,
which is the ugliest thing possible, but I am not
I have a simple question to you guy, Tiziano and Oscar: are your
standards identical, or at least non-contradictory?
Please check each other's work before you reply.
Greetings,
Michał
Am 14.01.2011 11:52, schrieb Oscar Formaggi:
I agree with Tiziano. I am among those interested in joining.
I agree with Tiziano. I am among those interested in joining.
Oscar
OSM Mapper of the whole city bus network in Ferrara, Italy
2011/1/14 Tiziano D'Angelo
> How about you, and the few of us who understand why the proposal is a mere
>> nonsense, develop a better proposal? We seem to share the und
>
> How about you, and the few of us who understand why the proposal is a mere
> nonsense, develop a better proposal? We seem to share the understanding of
> the flaws; a new proposal may lead to a secession, which is the ugliest
> thing possible, but I am not sure we can continue to improve the cu
On 01/14/2011 02:16 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
Dominik Mahrer wrote:
One month ago I already posted an RFC on this proposal. In the meantime
I got plenty of comments and I have extended/corrected/rewritten nearly
the whole proposal.
I'm not very happy with the extensive use of relations. Especial
47 matches
Mail list logo
