What i propose is keeping the existing relation for the "normal" direction. Example stadsbus nr 8 go from Bertem - Leuven - Bierbeek (check the relation with the relation checker). Give the same relationnumber to all bus-stops for that direction.
Make a complete new relation for the backward direction. Check the route, Give the bus-stops that new relation number. Example stadsbus nr 8 Bierbeek - Leuven - Bertem If you are in Leuven you can choose the bus 8 to Bierbeek (relation one) OR bus 8 to Bertem (relation 2). Maybe we can put in the conventions: relation 1 --> *bus 8* Bertem-Leuven-Bierbeek relation 2 --> *bus 8 ** Bierbeek - Leuven - Bertem 2010/8/10 Renaud MICHEL <r.h.michel+...@gmail.com<r.h.michel%2b...@gmail.com> > > Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 10:22, Tim Francois a écrit : > > +1. Yup, this is what is currently happening in most of the UK - a > > separate relation for the 'up' and 'down' bus routes, so that > > forwards/backwards (which is kinda broken as a concept in this case) > > is not required! > > I'm interested, for now I have created single relation for a bus route in > Liège. > How should I tag the two separate relations? > > The page > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buses > doesn't talk about double relation, but suggests that bus_stop should be > put > on the way, but the bus stops are not on the road but along it. > > -- > Renaud Michel > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > -- Ivo De Broeck Valleilaan 13 3360 Korbeek-lo Tel (0)16 43 84 93 Gsm +32 486 17 61 13
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
