I've made a decision for what I am going to do. If I wait until there is some standard way it will be a hassle to find all these stops later instead of putting them in now with all the other data, and I might loose my little scraps of paper.
Here's my plan of action. I'm going to put a node on the exact location of each bus stop offset from the way. I don't want to loose that location data until I'm sure we want to throw it out. Putting a node on the way instead would essentially erase the location of the stops and shelters. If someone wants to come along later and put a node on the way or make some kind of association they can do that. On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jeffrey Martin wrote: > > >Sent: 24 April 2008 9:06 AM > > > > >To: Peter Miller > > >Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org > > > > >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops > > > > > > > >Some people advocate nodes off to the side of the way > > >to represent the location of the pole or shelter in relation > > >to the road. > > > > > >Near where I live (Korea) there is often a shelter on > > >one side of the road for buses going both directions. > > >In that case I'm guessing I would put a shelter node > > >on one side of the road and a node that is not a shelter > > >on the other side. > > > > > >How do I relate these nodes to the way? I don't > > >like the idea of short segments perpendicular to > > >the way. > > > > Because a bus stop is a highway feature it really in my view should be > part > > of it. And because we map what we see on the ground then logically if > there > > are two bus stops not quite opposite each other then I place two nodes, > one > > for each and tag them appropriately. Placing short links from a bus > stop > > node placed off the highway to the highway itself is I guess fine if > those > > links are tagged as highway=footway, but personally I think that's a > lot of > > unnecessary effort and complexity in the map. > > Where as I think of bus stops as a pavement feature -- I really don't > care which road it's on, that's the bus driver's problem ;-) > I get the feeling we should be tagging both (if you can be bothered) > and linking the two -- but I'd prefer this didn't happen with short > footways... they come across to me as a bit fake. It's a virtual link, > so just keep it virtual: bus_stops=here or something. Alternatively > get out the relation box of tricks, but that might be unnecessarily > complicated. > It's certainly the better option than hacking someone's nice bus stops > into your own preferred style, even if you aren't going to do it that > way for new mapping. > > > > > The remaining issue revolves around the direction of the bus at a > particular > > node. I didn't have an answer to this until I looked at what the > signage was > > on my local bust stops. Now I find it easy to tag because each one > tells me > > in which direction the bus is travelling (eg "towards Birmingham"). So > I add > > a towards= tag and jobs a good un. > > This works! I generally find I need the help of a timetable to figure > out if I'm at the right stop as it's quite normal for the bus to be > heading in the wrong direction for the place stated if it's trying to > catch another stop on the way, but given the whole route information > you should be able to figure it out. > > > I'm not going to worry at the moment > > about how I might use this tag to make bus route information, the > important > > aspect is that the data that's needed to work that out later is in the > > database > > > And lets face it, the moment someone actually starts using this data > we'll probably decide to do something completely different anyway :-) > > Dave > -- http://bowlad.com
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk