On Feb 5, 2015 5:30 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 2/4/2015 11:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Generally, it is not feasible to use OSM as a dataset backing an
official GTFS feed. This is because the probability of the GTFS
dataset being uploaded to Google and thereby
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
Generally, it is not feasible to use OSM as a dataset backing an official
GTFS feed. This is because the probability of the GTFS dataset being
uploaded to Google and thereby violating the license if the street
centerlines or
On 2/3/2015 3:31 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Is the new style backwards compatible with the old style?
The new Public Transport style is backward compatible and offers a more
uniform tagging style with some additional capabilities (in my opinion).
Especially in
regards to potentially having
Is the new style backwards compatible with the old style? Especially in
regards to potentially having OSM as being the dataset for the official
GTFS feed in an area where the official data presently sucks, it'd be a
travesty if the new style makes going to and from GTFS *more* difficult for
Part of the problem between the tagging schemes and the rendering is that it's
a chicken-and-egg problem; a new tagging scheme is created, but rendering
support isn't there yet (partly because it's a somewhat complex structure), so
people might not use that scheme. However, if there were many
Saikrishna Arcot wrote:
Part of the problem between the tagging schemes and the rendering is
that it's a chicken-and-egg problem; a new tagging scheme is
created, but rendering support isn't there yet (partly because it's
a somewhat complex structure), so people might not use that scheme.
it is not clear if the new way is actually better, at least the
current data stats show that mappers still prefer the old method,
at least for bus stops, as it is simpler (you need just one tag
highway=bus_stop instead of two: public_transport=platform and
bus=yes, for the same information
2014-11-27 21:08 GMT+01:00 Saikrishna Arcot saiarcot...@gmail.com:
Not sure if this is the right list or the tagging list is better, but I
see some bus and subway routes in the Atlanta area that use the older
version of tagging public transport routes. Should these be updated to use
the newer
Throwing my hat into this one, I'm thinking the new style also reuses some
of the old style tags and conventions. That said, since I'm not trying to
automate a driverless bus fleet, I tend to only use the old style method.
Coincidentally, this generally works out well for most situations and is
Hi all,
Not sure if this is the right list or the tagging list is better, but I see
some bus and subway routes in the Atlanta area that use the older version of
tagging public transport routes. Should these be updated to use the newer
version of tagging?
--
Saikrishna Arcot
signature.asc
I was one of the people that did a lot of work on those. Go for it. Let me
know if you need help.
Bill
On Nov 27, 2014 3:09 PM, Saikrishna Arcot saiarcot...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Not sure if this is the right list or the tagging list is better, but I
see some bus and subway routes in the
On 11/27/2014 3:08 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote:
Not sure if this is the right list or the tagging list is better, but I see
some bus and subway routes in the Atlanta area that use the older version of
tagging public transport routes. Should these be updated to use the newer
version of tagging?
12 matches
Mail list logo
