The foot tram routes definitely only if there are signs along the road, indicating at what time the children are expected to be there.
the walking_bus seems like a school bus, but without an actual vehicle. There are stops with times that the 'bus' passes there and there is a fixed itinerary. I suppose these are organised by a specific school, to get the children on time to that school. For these I think it makes sense to map them. Not sure if the public transport scheme is the best for it, but at least it's what fits best. Polyglot 2018-05-06 10:53 GMT+02:00 Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9...@gmail.com>: > What about foot tram routes? Should they be mapped? > > > 06-05-2018 11:51 tarihinde Selfish Seahorse yazdı: > > Hi, > > > > Like Martin, I think the public transport scheme should not be used > > here, because a walking bus is neither a form of transport nor is it > > really public. > > > > > > On 6 May 2018 at 09:45, Lorenzo Stucchi <lorenzo.stuc...@mail.polimi.it> > wrote: > >> Hi, > >> I’m sorry for the error that I made using the old Public Transport > scheme, > >> so according to what was proposed before I correct the page proposing > the > >> tag: walikingbus=yes to be used with public_transport=platform like was > now > >> proposed in the page > >> > >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Walkingbus_stop > >> > >> Thanks and sorry again for my mistake > >> Hi, > >> LorenzoStucchi > >> > >> Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 12:28:09 +1000 > >> From: <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> > >> To: "'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools'" > >> <tagging@openstreetmap.org> > >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop > >> Message-ID: <00ab01d3e4e1$e1575d50$a40617f0$@thorsten.engler.id.au> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >> > >> Well, but based on your description, these are not planned routes in any > >> way. They are purely transient emergent behaviour based on the fact > that a > >> lot of people want to move between these two points, and this is the > obvious > >> way to go. > >> > >> Take the people away, and the phenomenon disappears. This is not > something > >> that does not exist on its own. > >> > >> A bus route, a foot or hiking route, or a walking bus route on the other > >> hand all exist even in the absence of people There are stops with signs, > >> guiding signs, brochures showing the route... The route is planned and > >> documented, and (at least till someone changes the planning) operate and > >> exist even in the absence of people using them. > >> > >> The only thing that exist of what you describe is the environment that > >> promotes this particular emergent behaviour, like the pedestrian zone > sign, > >> and these can and should obviously be mapped. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9...@gmail.com> > >> Sent: Sunday, 6 May 2018 00:59 > >> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop > >> > >> Not really transient and some routes can be over 500m in length. For > >> example, in Karşıyaka, more than 100 people/min/sq-m walks following > >> Bahriye Üçok Boulevard (western sidewalk only) and Kemalpaşa Avenue > >> (pedestrianised during the day and evening, pedestrian priority > >> otherwise, marked by a pedestrian zone sign) between Karşıyaka > >> Underground Car Parking and "Hergele Meydanı" (all comers' square). > >> > >> > >> 05-05-2018 17:51 tarihinde osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au yazdı: > >> > >> If they are unmarked on the ground, are they documented somewhere? > >> > >> Or is it simply a case of "this is a common route a lot of people > >> > >> walk > >> > >> during certain times as there is a strong flow of people from A to > >> > >> B > >> > >> and this is the most commonly used route"? (In which case they > >> > >> aren't > >> > >> really something that exists as an entity of it's own and are only > >> > >> a > >> > >> transient event, though maybe a commonly reoccurring one.) > >> > >> In either case, it doesn't sound like a "walking bus" at all. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9...@gmail.com> > >> Sent: Sunday, 6 May 2018 00:09 > >> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop > >> > >> No, foot tram routes are unmarked but you can easily join one by > >> following the crowd. Normal foot routes have guiding signs. > >> > >> > >> 05-05-2018 17:05 tarihinde osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au > >> > >> yazdı: > >> > >> Without a "driver", fixed "stops" and a defined schedule, that > >> > >> sounds more like what's currently already mapped using > >> > >> route=foot > >> > >> relations? > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9...@gmail.com> > >> Sent: Saturday, 5 May 2018 23:28 > >> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop > >> > >> We also have walking bus routes in Turkey but without drivers. > >> > >> We > >> > >> call them "tabanvay", foot tram. You can have very crowded > >> > >> walking > >> > >> bus routes in peak times, especially in pedestrian road > >> > >> networks. > >> > >> > >> > >> 05-05-2018 15:59 tarihinde osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au > >> > >> yazdı: > >> > >> If there are actual poles and stop signs, you can only “board” > >> > >> at > >> > >> these places and at specific times, and the “driver” stays > >> > >> with > >> > >> the > >> > >> group from the first to the last stop, then yeah, I can see > >> > >> this > >> > >> as > >> > >> being very different from a “school crossing guard” which > >> > >> generally > >> > >> stays at one specific crossing and controls the traffic there. > >> > >> And > >> > >> under these conditions, I think the term “platform” as it is > >> > >> used > >> > >> in > >> > >> PTv2 does apply to the position of the poles. > >> > >> > >> > >> *From:*Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > >> *Sent:* Saturday, 5 May 2018 22:42 > >> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools > >> <tagging@openstreetmap.org> > >> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - > >> > >> Walkingbus_stop > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> sent from a phone > >> > >> > >> On 4. May 2018, at 22:34, Johnparis <ok...@johnfreed.com > >> <mailto:ok...@johnfreed.com>> wrote: > >> > >> Please DO follow Thorsten's suggestion and follow PTv2, > >> > >> mapping > >> > >> the stops as nodes alongside the street/way (not on it) in > >> > >> the > >> > >> proper direction. Tag each one: > >> > >> walking_bus=yes > >> > >> public_transport=platform > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> is walking really a kind of “public transport”? Are we going > >> > >> to > >> > >> tag > >> > >> places as public transport platforms where people are waiting > >> > >> for > >> > >> someone else to accompany them for walking somewhere? > >> > >> > >> > >> To me “walking bus” seems just a new buzzword for a service > >> > >> that > >> > >> has > >> > >> been in existence for a long time (school crossing guards) and > >> > >> that > >> > >> was never considered public transport until someone proclaimed > >> > >> it > >> > >> could be seen as kind of “bus” but without a vehicle ;-) > >> > >> > >> > >> I don’t think it shouldn’t be tagged, but I don’t see it as > >> > >> public > >> > >> transport either, particularly I don’t believe we should use > >> > >> the > >> > >> term > >> > >> platform in context of this kind of service > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> cheers, > >> > >> Martin > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Subject: Digest Footer > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> End of Tagging Digest, Vol 104, Issue 17 > >> **************************************** > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
