I'll probably be shot down on sight, but I wanted to be efficient and I
created 'sub'-relations for parts of bus routes that are used by more than
one line. As long as they recurse only one level deep, josm seems to be able
to cope with them. I've been putting the mapping of bus routes off until
child relations were properly supported.
Then I went to have a look at how it all ought to be mapped and all I got
now is a blurred idea of what seems to be ideal (Oxomoa, who thought of
everything) and whether this practice has been accepted, or not. I can't
seem to find out whether I should create a relation for each direction
(which seems cleaner, but duplicates data), or work with forward and
backward constructions in one relation for both directions.

And, of course, I can't find any information on my own 'invention'/crutch:
the use of child relations on parts of bus routes that are shared by more
than 4 bus lines. This would greatly reduce the time I have to put in to
maintain these relations, although it does add some complexity.

I'm reading that the developers didn't mean for relations to be nested in
one another, but why did they give us the possibility to create child
relations, then, in the first place?

I tend to like the use of relations to group data about a bus stop and to
group bus stops together, as well. It's unfortunate that the tag remains
HIGHWAY=bus_stop though, since it's not part of the highway, after all. This
has always felt awkward to me, since I could only tag such bus stops on one
way roads, as I wanted to indicate on what side of the road the stop
actually was. Besides, here in Belgium each stop has a unique ref number,
which is different on each side of the road. We should have come up with a
better tag like public_transportation=bus_stop in the first place.

All that to say, that I, now, still don't know how to tag bus_stops and
quays and stopping positions, etc.

Jo
_______________________________________________
Talk-transit mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Reply via email to