Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Michael Reichert]

Hi,

Am 2017-10-14 um 06:49 schrieb Jo:
> Maybe
> 
> recheck_itinerary_route_by
> 
> would be a better tag. Then it can also be used when route relations are
> changed for roadworks that take more than say, a month and that cause
> changes in itinerary.

If recheck_itinerary_route_by= reduces the confusion (see email by
Andrew) and nobody opposes on this mailing list (or a parallel
discussion), I will change the proposed tag. In addition, this tag will
hopefully discourage mappers from adding a start_date equivalent
although it was not proposed (An end implies a start, doesn't it?).

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Michael Reichert]

Hi,

Am 2017-10-14 um 00:29 schrieb Jo:
> 2017-10-13 23:59 GMT+02:00 Andrew Davidson :
> We don't have a scheme to tag the timetables and it would be quite hard to
> come up with one, involving many relations we don't want to maintain.
> Better to leave that part to GTFS.
> 
> So the proposal is about the routes/itineraries that change, stops that
> aren't served anymore or new stops added to the lines. Not about the bus
> passing by 10 minutes earlier at 8 am on Wednesdays.
> 
> That's the way I understand it, anyway.

That's my intention.

I think that timetable details (departure times) should not be mapped in
OSM due to the reasons given by Jo.

Best regards

Michael


-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Warin,

Am 2017-10-13 um 23:22 schrieb Warin:
> On 14-Oct-17 04:11 AM, Michael Reichert wrote:
>> end_date=* is used on disused objects or objects whose last day of
>> operation/service is known. Common examples are disused railway tracks
>> or shops which announced the last day they will be open. The latter
>> example is mainly used in areas with a high density of active mappers.
>> :-)
>>
>> The wiki page you linked to discourages the use of end_date=* because
>> historic information is kept in OSM only until a certain limit. An
>> object with highway=trunk + end_date=2016-05-21 should be tagged
>> highway=disused + disused=trunk (or lifecycle prefix instead) and maybe
>> with end_date=* because data consumers are not used to look on secondary
>> tags which invert the meaning of the main tag.
>>
>> I did not choose end_date=-MM-DD because that tag would imply that
>> the service on the given public transport line will end -MM-DD but
>> that's wrong. timetable:valid_until=* is intended to be an expiry tag
>> (i.e. you don't have to check this OSM object until -MM-DD.
> 
> timetable:end_date=* would be better than a new tag of valid_until=* ?

I am ok with using timetable:end_date=* instead of
timetable:valid_until=*. But I am not ok with valid_until=* because it
implies that the service on the given line will end on the given date.
But what I want to express is the validity of the timetable the route
relation is based on.

>> Unfortunately, sometimes timetables or operators change not only in
>> December but also in June. New (railway) lines or stations are not
>> always opened at the great timetable change in December. There are
>> frequent cases when (smaller) stations are opened in the course of the
>> year.
>>
> The unscheduled changes will also occur with timetable:end_date=*, or
> similar.

If a new halt on a line is opened in the course of the year, the route
relations has to be modified on that date. If a mapper knows that a new
halt will be added before the next timetable change (sometimes
timetables have nots like "halt X is not served until "), he
could/should set the timetable:valid_until=* to the planned opening date
of the new halt.

Best regards

Michael


-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Jo]

Maybe

recheck_itinerary_route_by

would be a better tag. Then it can also be used when route relations are
changed for roadworks that take more than say, a month and that cause
changes in itinerary.

Polyglot

2017-10-14 2:00 GMT+02:00 Andrew Davidson :

>
>
> On 14/10/17 09:29, Jo wrote:
>
>
>> So the proposal is about the routes/itineraries that change, stops that
>> aren't served anymore or new stops added to the lines.
>>
>
> Are you sure about that? The proposed new tag is "timetable:valid_until".
> And the explanation starts of with:
>
> "every year timetables of many public transport services in Europe change
> on the second Saturday in December at 24:00"
>
> That's a lot of use of the phrase timetable if they actually mean route.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Andrew Davidson]

On 14/10/17 09:29, Jo wrote:



So the proposal is about the routes/itineraries that change, stops that 
aren't served anymore or new stops added to the lines.


Are you sure about that? The proposed new tag is 
"timetable:valid_until". And the explanation starts of with:


"every year timetables of many public transport services in Europe 
change on the second Saturday in December at 24:00"


That's a lot of use of the phrase timetable if they actually mean route.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Andrew Davidson]

On 14 Oct. 2017 08:24, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:


> Personally I don't enter timetable data, not something I expect the map to
deal with. .




This was something I wanted to clarify. Are we discussing changing routes
(ie: the stops and the order they are served in) or changing timetables
(ie: when they are served)?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Warin]

On 14-Oct-17 04:11 AM, Michael Reichert wrote:

Hi Andrew,

Am 12.10.2017 um 22:45 schrieb Andrew Davidson:

Do you want data users to consume this tag? Or is intended for other
mappers to know when something needs to be updated?

It is their decision what they consume and what not. The primary users
are mappers and validators. But if data consumers see any benefit, they
should not be hindered to use this tag.


There does appear to be a strong push against using tags that indicate
something has gone from the map:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:end_date

end_date=* is used on disused objects or objects whose last day of
operation/service is known. Common examples are disused railway tracks
or shops which announced the last day they will be open. The latter
example is mainly used in areas with a high density of active mappers. :-)

The wiki page you linked to discourages the use of end_date=* because
historic information is kept in OSM only until a certain limit. An
object with highway=trunk + end_date=2016-05-21 should be tagged
highway=disused + disused=trunk (or lifecycle prefix instead) and maybe
with end_date=* because data consumers are not used to look on secondary
tags which invert the meaning of the main tag.

I did not choose end_date=-MM-DD because that tag would imply that
the service on the given public transport line will end -MM-DD but
that's wrong. timetable:valid_until=* is intended to be an expiry tag
(i.e. you don't have to check this OSM object until -MM-DD.


timetable:end_date=* would be better than a new tag of valid_until=* ?





If this is for other mappers then maybe:

1. note:valid_until=*

note=* is not intended to be machine-readable. Why should any note:*=* be?


2. source=* source:date=-MM (ie: more than 12 months ago needs to be
updated).

Unfortunately, sometimes timetables or operators change not only in
December but also in June. New (railway) lines or stations are not
always opened at the great timetable change in December. There are
frequent cases when (smaller) stations are opened in the course of the year.


The unscheduled changes will also occur with timetable:end_date=*, or similar.

Personally I don't enter timetable data, not something I expect the map to deal 
with. .


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Erkin Alp Güney]

They may open any time. It is sometimes associated with political
events. However, closures almost always happen on the start of the
timetable period.

Michael wrote:
> Unfortunately, sometimes timetables or operators change not only in
> December but also in June. New (railway) lines or stations are not
> always opened at the great timetable change in December. There are
> frequent cases when (smaller) stations are opened in the course of the year.
>
Yours, faithfully
Erkin Alp

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

[Warin]

Possibly an application for end_date ? 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:end_date


On 13-Oct-17 07:45 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
Do you want data users to consume this tag? Or is intended for other 
mappers to know when something needs to be updated?


There does appear to be a strong push against using tags that indicate 
something has gone from the map:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:end_date

If this is for other mappers then maybe:

1. note:valid_until=*
2. source=* source:date=-MM (ie: more than 12 months ago needs to 
be updated).


On 13/10/17 06:10, Michael Reichert wrote:

Hi,

every year timetables of many public transport services in Europe change
on the second Saturday in December at 24:00. At this date lots of
changes are necessary to route relations – operators change, reference
numbers change or whole networks are restructured.

I would like to introduce a tag called timetable:valid_until=* which
indicates until which date a route is valid. If you update a route, you
usually know until when the corresponding timetable is valid.

For further information and the reasons why I did not choose a
corresponding start tag, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Validity_of_Route_Relations 



Feedback is welcomed, especially if you have suggestions for the name of
the key.

I crosspost to the Talk-transit mailing list, the German mailing list
"Nahverkehr" and the German OSM forum because the German forum is place
where people frequently discuss public transport mapping.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/2017-October/001876.html 

https://lists.openstreetmap.de/pipermail/nahverkehr/2017-October/46.html 


https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=667930#p667930

Best regards

Michael



___
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