On 11 Aug 2009, at 09:23, Frankie Roberto wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Jochen Topf
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:31:10AM +0200, Cartinus wrote:
> On Monday 10 August 2009 09:10:15 Jochen Topf wrote:
> > The "infrastructure route" is something different from the
"moving vehic
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Jochen Topf wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:31:10AM +0200, Cartinus wrote:
> > On Monday 10 August 2009 09:10:15 Jochen Topf wrote:
> > > The "infrastructure route" is something different from the "moving
> vehicles
> > > forming a route". They are two differe
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:31:10AM +0200, Cartinus wrote:
> On Monday 10 August 2009 09:10:15 Jochen Topf wrote:
> > The "infrastructure route" is something different from the "moving vehicles
> > forming a route". They are two different concepts, so they deserve their
> > own keys. A bicycle route
On Monday 10 August 2009 09:10:15 Jochen Topf wrote:
> The "infrastructure route" is something different from the "moving vehicles
> forming a route". They are two different concepts, so they deserve their
> own keys. A bicycle route or walking route is more like an "infrastructure
> route", there
On 10 Aug 2009, at 08:10, Jochen Topf wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 09:30:34PM +0100, Frankie Roberto wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Jochen Topf
>> wrote:
>>
>>
For vehicles:
The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 09:30:34PM +0100, Frankie Roberto wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Jochen Topf wrote:
>
>
> > > For vehicles:
> > > The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
> > > The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
> > > The route tram 13 follows is route=tram.
> > > The
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Jochen Topf wrote:
> > For vehicles:
> > The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
> > The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
> > The route tram 13 follows is route=tram.
> > The route the Eurostar follows is route=train.
> >
> > For infrastructure:
> > The "
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 02:12:35AM +0200, Cartinus wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 August 2009 00:37:50 Frankie Roberto wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs
> > infrastructure issue.
> >
>
> IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapp
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping.
>
> For vehicles:
> The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
> The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
> The route tram 13 follows is route=tram.
> The route the Eurostar follo
On 6 Aug 2009, at 13:52, Hillsman, Edward wrote:
Can anyone find the post for the French guy who talked about
OpenTimetableService or OpenStreetTimetable, something like that? It
was about 6 months ago I think.
Maybe it is the OpenTransport project
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tal
On 5 Aug 2009, at 14:41, Richard Mann wrote:
> Yes Frederik could tidy things up, but it's best not to change
> things arbitrarily (ie substituting line for route), because it just
> makes it harder to remember what is correct. The lack of presets for
> relations in Potlatch makes it doubly
Yes Frederik could tidy things up, but it's best not to change things
arbitrarily (ie substituting line for route), because it just makes it
harder to remember what is correct. The lack of presets for relations in
Potlatch makes it doubly useful to minimise the complexity.
Richard
On 5 Aug 2009, at 13:13, Richard Mann wrote:
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Cartinus wrote:
IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping.
For vehicles:
The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
The route tram 13 follows is rout
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Richard Mann <
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Deprecating route= and replacing it with line= for most things where we
>> currently use route= is a lot of work for no real gain.
>
>
> Though I'd go for route=railway for infrastructure, since route
Some information lies better on the infrastructure, so for some purposes you
want both. I've concluded that infrastructure relations are probably the
best way to mark whether route sections are predominantly 1-track, 2-track,
4-track etc. I don't think we've identified much of a need for
infrastruc
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping.
>
> For vehicles:
> The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
> The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
> The route tram 13 follows is route=tram.
> The route the Eurostar follow
Couldn't you just use the network tag on the 3 tram route relations
and merge the results to get this relations? It requires a bit more
preprocessing to get the information that you are looking for, whilst
making it easier for mappers and reducing the data size.
Shaun
On 4 Aug 2009, at 23:
On 4 Aug 2009, at 23:37, Frankie Roberto wrote:
Hi all,
I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs
infrastructure issue.
I have create a new wiki-page 'Public transport schema 2' based on
Oxomoa's proposal on the main wiki based on the last edit made before
the big
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 00:37:50 Frankie Roberto wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs
> infrastructure issue.
>
IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping.
For vehicles:
The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
The ro
Hi all,
I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs
infrastructure issue.
I think this mainly applies to railways, however, as I've mentioned before,
I'm trying out a few of the ideas on the UK's much smaller list of tram
networks.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Ki
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Jochen Topf wrote:
> The first question is what does route=railway denote, the infrastructure
> or
> > the service pattern?
>
> This has been solved in Sebastians proposal:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Oxomoa/Public_transport_schema#Differentiation
On 29 Jul 2009, at 20:27, Jochen Topf wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:24:34PM +0100, Frankie Roberto wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Peter Miller > >wrote:
>>
>>> I think the problem is that we are using the term Route for at
>>> least two
>>> different things.
>>>
>>
>> The more
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:24:34PM +0100, Frankie Roberto wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Peter Miller
> wrote:
>
> > I think the problem is that we are using the term Route for at least two
> > different things.
> >
>
> The more I think about it, the more I think this needs resolving
Hi all,
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
> I think the problem is that we are using the term Route for at least two
> different things.
>
The more I think about it, the more I think this needs resolving (and well
documenting)!
The first question is what does route=railway de
On 9 Jul 2009, at 10:54, Frankie Roberto wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Peter Miller > wrote:
I am happy to change the settings for this list, but then it will be
different from most other lists. Lets have a poll and follow the
majority. I will stay neutral!
For some reason I
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
> I am happy to change the settings for this list, but then it will be
> different from most other lists. Lets have a poll and follow the majority. I
> will stay neutral!
>
For some reason I had it in my head that the main osm-talk list had re
On 9 Jul 2009, at 10:39, Frankie Roberto wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Richard Mann > wrote:
You went off-liste
Dammit. Can we change the reply-to settings? (or has that debate
been done to death already?)
I am happy to change the settings for this list, but then it will be
dif
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Richard Mann <
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com> wrote:
You went off-liste
>
Dammit. Can we change the reply-to settings? (or has that debate been done
to death already?)
> I'd think I'd propose an alternative service such as service=heritage (or
> stick w
This seems to use:
line=light_rail for S(tadt)-Bahn, when I think the schema suggests
line=rail+service=commuter
Were you going to pick up any of the service=* types, or is it too early for
that?
Richard
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Melchior Moos wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2009/7/8 Richard Mann
>
>
You went off-liste
I'd think I'd propose an alternative service such as service=heritage (or
stick with service=regional):
type=line
line=rail
service=heritage
ref=abbreviated name of railway (it's not like there's going to be more than
one service on the line)
Richard
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:5
Hi,
2009/7/8 Richard Mann
> The public transport schema says we should be tagging rail service
> relations as:
>
> No route tag
> line=rail
> service = high_speed / long_distance / regional / commuter
> ref = service reference
> nat_ref = national timetable reference
>
> Whereas oepnv-karte is s
The public transport schema says we should be tagging rail service relations
as:
No route tag
line=rail
service = high_speed / long_distance / regional / commuter
ref = service reference
nat_ref = national timetable reference
Whereas oepnv-karte is seems to be rendering on the basis of:
green for
Peter Miller schrieb:
> Personally I see this being a very useful piece of information about the
> Peterborough to Ely line and like the way the relation overlays on the
> slippery map for more detail:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/142758 (relation for Peter
> to Ely line)
I think
On 6 Jul 2009, at 21:24, Melchior Moos wrote:
Hi,
2009/7/6 Brian Prangle
I've experimented with the section of the West Coast Mainline
between B'ham New St and B'ham International: I've added a train
(i.e service) relation with ref=WCML and also a railway (i.e
physical) relation with ref
Hi,
2009/7/6 Brian Prangle
> I've experimented with the section of the West Coast Mainline between B'ham
> New St and B'ham International: I've added a train (i.e service) relation
> with ref=WCML and also a railway (i.e physical) relation with ref =17.01 (
> the SRS dor the section of track) to
I'd agree with Brian; the infrastructure relations don't help. At last count
the services using the line were:
VT: Euston-Birmingham & Wolverhampton (aka EBW) (InterCity)
XC: Manchester-Bournemouth (InterCity)
LM: Northampton/Coventry-Birmingham (Regional locals; there's quite a bit of
skip-stoppi
I've experimented with the section of the West Coast Mainline between B'ham
New St and B'ham International: I've added a train (i.e service) relation
with ref=WCML and also a railway (i.e physical) relation with ref =17.01 (
the SRS dor the section of track) to see how it rendered in opnvkarte. I'd
37 matches
Mail list logo
