On 1 Jun 2009, at 23:09, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 08:05:30AM +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
>>> For railway stations it can be sure that there is exactly one symbol
>>> on the line of the railway neatly aligned to the middle of the way.
>>> With the new schema a lot of preproce
een trying to keep up with the
changes in terminology and the difference between StopPlaces and
StopAreas will be another. It does help in the long term.
>> From: talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org
>> [mailto:talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org
>> ] On Behalf Of Frankie
ansit@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Public transport workshop in Germany
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Peter Miller > wrote:
> The current situation with bus stops is more messy. (Just see
> Birmigham which seems to entirely consist of bus stops.) While
> stop places
Behalf Of Frankie Roberto
Sent: 01 June 2009 08:34
To: talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Public transport workshop in Germany
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
> The current situation with bus stops is more messy. (Just see
> Birmigham which
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
> > The current situation with bus stops is more messy. (Just see
> > Birmigham which seems to entirely consist of bus stops.) While
> > stop places in the new schema allow to clean this up a bit, again,
> > the renderer only has the choice to e
Behalf Of Peter Miller
Sent: 01 June 2009 08:06
To: Sarah Hoffmann
Cc: talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Public transport workshop in Germany
On 31 May 2009, at 12:45, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> The weekend before last we had
On 31 May 2009, at 12:45, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> The weekend before last we had a workshop in Karlsruhe, Germany on
>> the
>> topic of public transport in OSM. The idea was to bring interested
>> people together to improve the modelling of public transport
>> infrastructure
Hi,
> Hi!
>
> The weekend before last we had a workshop in Karlsruhe, Germany on the
> topic of public transport in OSM. The idea was to bring interested
> people together to improve the modelling of public transport
> infrastructure and networks in OSM.
>
> The results have now been documented
On 30 May 2009, at 12:33, Hugh Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2009 17:56:19 +0200
> Gerrit Lammert wrote:
>
>>
>>
>
>> That said: I really _am_ happy that there is some progress in this
>> field. As you guys have a group (and the geofabrik) behind you, its
>> much more likely to succeed and beco
On Fri, 29 May 2009 17:56:19 +0200
Gerrit Lammert wrote:
>
> As I mentioned earlier, I am founder and main contributor to the
> unified_stoparea proposal.
>
> Well, I actually _do_ feel a little offended by two things.
> - First: I am confused at how little reference to "my" proposal I find
> i
Jochen Topf wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 06:07:55AM +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
>> Out of interest where does this leave the following two proposals?
>>
>> Unified StopArea
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/unified_stoparea
>>
>> QROTI
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/
Hi Jochen.
Jochen Topf wrote:
> The weekend before last we had a workshop in Karlsruhe, Germany on the
> topic of public transport in OSM. The idea was to bring interested
> people together to improve the modelling of public transport
> infrastructure and networks in OSM.
>
> The results have now
I am forwarding comments from Nick Knowles on the proposals emerging
from the workshop at his request.
His comments do confirm that there is a high degree of conformance
with the CEN standard already which is encouraging.
He does make some suggestions for greater conformance because this
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 08:54:48AM +0100, Roger Slevin wrote:
> What has not been mentioned specifically in this thread (although I know
> Peter is very much aware of it) is that there is an approved European
> Technical Specification (Identification of Fixed Objects in Public Transport
> - IFOPT)
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 06:07:55AM +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
> Agreed, This is a very good piece of work. We are getting some other
> feedback together at the moment. Can we spend a few days finessing it
> before doing any serious tagging from it.
We have already started tagging a bit in Karl
transport workshop in Germany
On 29 May 2009, at 00:23, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
> clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised here
> in the past.
> It looks like it's somewhat compatible with the euro
On 29 May 2009, at 08:34, Sebastian Schwarz wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Thomas Wood wrote:
>
>> One concern I have (and one that's probably been expressed many
>> times on talk@ etc) is the use of disused=*, rather than adjusting
>> the 'primary' tag on the feature. (eg, railway=disused
>> disused=light_rai
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 07:32:04AM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> Also in this diagram -
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Stoparea_data.png, shouldn't
> it be ref=A rather than name=Platform A?
Maybe it should be both. The "name" is more the thing people use when
they talk about an object,
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 07:32:04AM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> One thing I think needs work on is how the new scheme's network
> information aligns with the current route relation tagging.
I am not sure I understand your question correctly. So maybe this is the
wrong answer:
The plan is to automa
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:23:03AM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> One concern I have (and one that's probably been expressed many times
> on talk@ etc) is the use of disused=*, rather than adjusting the
> 'primary' tag on the feature. (eg, railway=disused disused=light_rail
> etc)
I think mixing the
Hi!
Thomas Wood wrote:
> I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
> clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised
> here in the past.
Thank you very much, I (and most probably the rest of the group, too)
appreciate that!
> One concern I have (
One thing I think needs work on is how the new scheme's network
information aligns with the current route relation tagging.
Also in this diagram -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Stoparea_data.png, shouldn't
it be ref=A rather than name=Platform A?
2009/5/29 Thomas Wood :
> I must congra
On 29 May 2009, at 00:23, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
> clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised here
> in the past.
> It looks like it's somewhat compatible with the european
> Transmodel/IFOPT standards which i
On 29 May 2009, at 00:23, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
> clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised here
> in the past.
> It looks like it's somewhat compatible with the european
> Transmodel/IFOPT standards which i
I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised here
in the past.
It looks like it's somewhat compatible with the european
Transmodel/IFOPT standards which is a promising step. As others have
noted, where possible
Hi!
The weekend before last we had a workshop in Karlsruhe, Germany on the
topic of public transport in OSM. The idea was to bring interested
people together to improve the modelling of public transport
infrastructure and networks in OSM.
The results have now been documented. See
http://blog.geo
26 matches
Mail list logo
