Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich

2011-02-07 Thread Richard Mann
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) te...@teddy.ch wrote:
 I did not play around with actual renderers, but in theory the renderer
 should be able to get the diagram out of the order of the stops, regardless
 of the role. If one stop is twice in the route relation it should be obvious
 that it has to be some kind of loop. So in theory forward_stop and
 backward_stop can be replaced by the role stop.

In theory data users should be able to do without roles at all (though
they might appreciate some help if there are a lot of
direction-specific stop names), and data users should be encouraged
not to depend on them.

I think the simplified advice is that roles aren't required (but
that if you want to make the line-diagram service work with a
two-directions relation, then - for the moment - you need to do xyz).

Can anyone point me to a route relation with platform  stop members,
so I can check how the line-diagram service works in that situation?

Richard

___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit


Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich

2011-02-07 Thread Michael von Glasow

On 02/07/2011 10:45 AM, Richard Mann wrote:

Can anyone point me to a route relation with platform  stop members,
so I can check how the line-diagram service works in that situation?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/611446
Single-direction, the first stop (Bonola) is a platform member (no stop 
member exists for this one); all others are stop members.


Both directions rendered:
http://78.46.81.38/api/sketch-line?network=SITAMref=80style=padua

Michael

___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit