Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

Please keep in mind that round-trip is in considerable use to describe the
overall geometry of cycling and hiking routes. Don't change the meaning.

On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 11:09 Peter Elderson,  wrote:

> True! I have seen a few educational or theme routes that way.  In that
> case it's meant to be a roundtrip, or you make a roundtrip using the same
> way back by necessity.
> Regular linear hikes are not meant to be used as roundtrips, though you
> could go back the same way of course.
>
> I would use roundtrip=yes only for routes designed for roundtrips. Which
> can encompass a lot of geographical layouts, even single chain linear
> routes as illustrated by your example. A closed_loop would automatically
> qualify as a roundtrip, I think, but I trust someone will come up with an
> exception!
>
> Fr gr Peter Elderson
>
> Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 08:52 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> > On 22. Dec 2019, at 16:43, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>> >
>> > A linear walking route marked in both directions is not a roundtrip.
>> You're not guided to turn around at the end and return to the start.
>>
>>
>> there are cases where it’s unavoidable, because there is only one way.
>>
>> Cheers Martin
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

True! I have seen a few educational or theme routes that way.  In that case
it's meant to be a roundtrip, or you make a roundtrip using the same way
back by necessity.
Regular linear hikes are not meant to be used as roundtrips, though you
could go back the same way of course.

I would use roundtrip=yes only for routes designed for roundtrips. Which
can encompass a lot of geographical layouts, even single chain linear
routes as illustrated by your example. A closed_loop would automatically
qualify as a roundtrip, I think, but I trust someone will come up with an
exception!

Fr gr Peter Elderson

Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 08:52 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 22. Dec 2019, at 16:43, Peter Elderson  wrote:
> >
> > A linear walking route marked in both directions is not a roundtrip.
> You're not guided to turn around at the end and return to the start.
>
>
> there are cases where it’s unavoidable, because there is only one way.
>
> Cheers Martin
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 23/12/19 18:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 22. Dec 2019, at 16:43, Peter Elderson  wrote:

A linear walking route marked in both directions is not a roundtrip. You're not 
guided to turn around at the end and return to the start.


there are cases where it’s unavoidable, because there is only one way.


Only one entry/exit ?? roundtrip=compulsory ???

Humm... looks to me like there are too many meanings that people use for this 
tag. I think I'll remove the tag from my contributions.




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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 22. Dec 2019, at 16:43, Peter Elderson  wrote:
> 
> A linear walking route marked in both directions is not a roundtrip. You're 
> not guided to turn around at the end and return to the start.


there are cases where it’s unavoidable, because there is only one way.

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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

Good point. I would say roundtrip is the service provided. But if a route
is designed for roundtrip service i.e. if you remain seated you end up at
the starting point, roundtrip becomes an attribute of the route. However,
most PT allows you to book or perform a roundtrip. Because even if you get
off and later back on, even on a different vehicle and/or by a different
route, it's still a roundtrip, no matter the layout of the routes.

(Nederand used to have roundtrip tickets, priced at 1 1/2 the cost of two
separate single way tickets. You could get roundtrip tickets ("retours")
valid on one day, or roundtrips with open return day. Now, we pay per
kilometer, so that's history. For now!).

In short, I think circular would be the better term if the route is
"circular". I would not retag, though. I am not a PT-mapper or PT datauser.
But I have to ask: is it absolutely clear what it means if a PT-route is
mapped as a roundtrip? Is this information really used?

Fr gr Peter Elderson


Op zo 22 dec. 2019 om 15:34 schreef marc marc :

> 3 240 (10%) objects with rountrip=3 also have public_transport:version=*
> ex https://www.ratp.fr/plans-lignes/noctilien/n01
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1083331
>
> Le 22.12.19 à 11:57, Peter Elderson a écrit :
> > For PT, roundtrip is not an attribute of the route
> >
> >> Op 21 dec. 2019 om 15:31 heeft marc marc het volgende geschreven:
> >>
> >> I always thought that routrip=yes was an alternative when there is no
> >> start and end point to enter in from=* to=* key.
> >> Otherwise circular routes with a known start/end point can enter
> >> as from=A via=B to=A.
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

> 
> If following the route marking you will get back to start... It's a circular 
> route.
> As previously stated you could find marking on both directions and be a 
> single line straight and then reverse.
> With old wiki definition this is Roundtrip=no... Now it is Roundtrip=yes
> Seems sane to me.

A linear walking route marked in both directions is not a roundtrip. You're not 
guided to turn around at the end and return to the start. You are free to do 
that and make your cross-the-alps trail a roundtrip, of course, but I have yet 
to encounter anyone who does that. Could become an Australian hype maybe? :)
So no, I wouldn't expect linear walking routes to get tagged as roundtrip=yes. 
circular is fine too, as long as it can be applied to routes that are not 
strictly circular (closed_loop). Such as having a common approach/exit section, 
crossing itself one or more times, or having a common middle section between 
two loops. This would still qualify as roundtrip to me, because the 'service' 
i.e. the waymarking, brings you back to the start.  bidirectional waymarking 
does not a roundtrip make, it just says you can choose to do the hike in both 
directions.
At the same time, if circular just means the same as roundtrip (for walking 
routes), I would not change current tagging. Lots of work to achieve nothing, 
not my favorite.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[marc marc]

3 240 (10%) objects with rountrip=3 also have public_transport:version=*
ex https://www.ratp.fr/plans-lignes/noctilien/n01
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1083331

Le 22.12.19 à 11:57, Peter Elderson a écrit :
> For PT, roundtrip is not an attribute of the route
> 
>> Op 21 dec. 2019 om 15:31 heeft marc marc het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> I always thought that routrip=yes was an alternative when there is no
>> start and end point to enter in from=* to=* key.
>> Otherwise circular routes with a known start/end point can enter
>> as from=A via=B to=A.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il dom 22 dic 2019, 11:59 Peter Elderson  ha scritto:

> For PT, roundtrip is not an attribute of the route, it's a type of ticket
> or it's what you use the transport for. You can do a roundtrip on a
> circular line, but also on non-circular lines or mostly non-circular with a
> loop at the end, whatever. To express that a PT route is circular, I think
> the term circular would be better than roundtrip.
>

Agreed. My intention was to avoid Roundtrip as sinonym of Circular.


> For hiking|foot routes, exception is the rule when it comes to branches,
> alternatives, excursions, approaches and shortcuts. For me roundtrip on a
> walking route relation means: when you keep following the main route
> markings, it takes you back to where you begun. This does not exclude any
> alternatives, such as optional extra loops or a common approach/exit route
> at a starting point.


If following the route marking you will get back to start... It's a
circular route.
As previously stated you could find marking on both directions and be a
single line straight and then reverse.
With old wiki definition this is Roundtrip=no... Now it is Roundtrip=yes
Seems sane to me.

Only roundtrip=yes is needed here, if not present assume it's not a
roundtrip. Note that many trails consist of a number of linear routes,
together making for a roundtrip. I tag roundtrip=yes only on the parent
route relation. Loop or circular would also be just fine, but I see no
reason to change existing tagging here.

Do you mean old definition or the new one?


> Question: who wants to know if a route is a circular route/loop/roundtrip?
> Is it the map user? No, (s)he can see it on the map.


Don't forget OSM is a database.. a new tag that helps to classify things
(without overtagging) can be useful. Can you extract easily all circular or
linear routes with current scheme?


Is it important for routing and navigation? I can't see how, but there are
> experts on this list who know more about this. So far I know of only one
> application: categorisation/filtering of trips in order to present the user
> a choice between roundtrip walks or linear walks. The roundtrips were
> actually meant to be daytrips, and linear walks were to be presented as "
> long distance walks", but a separate category long distance roundtrips
> could be deducted from the data, I guess.
>
> Question: who wants to know if a route is actually a closed loop without
> any branches?
> What do you need this information for?


Personally I would only be interested in the validation part. I already
wrote some rule in JOSM and Osmose... I don't currently plan to fix all
existing routes, but hopefully could help to figure how to do it.


So far, I know one application: if a route is tagged as a closed loop, e.g.
with closed_loop=yes, and it's not complete or interrupted somewhere, you
can detect that with a checking tool. It would be a sort of fixme, then.
Most routes I maintain would not profit from that.

>
>
> FrGr Peter Elderson
>
> > Op 21 dec. 2019 om 15:31 heeft marc marc 
> het volgende geschreven:
> >
> > I always thought that routrip=yes was an alternative when there is no
> > start and end point to enter in from=* to=* key.
> > Otherwise circular routes with a known start/end point can enter
> > as from=A via=B to=A.
> > ___
> > 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

For PT, roundtrip is not an attribute of the route, it's a type of ticket or 
it's what you use the transport for. You can do a roundtrip on a circular line, 
but also on non-circular lines or mostly non-circular with a loop at the end, 
whatever. To express that a PT route is circular, I think the term circular 
would be better than roundtrip. 

For hiking|foot routes, exception is the rule when it comes to branches, 
alternatives, excursions, approaches and shortcuts. For me roundtrip on a 
walking route relation means: when you keep following the main route markings, 
it takes you back to where you begun. This does not exclude any alternatives, 
such as optional extra loops or a common approach/exit route at a starting 
point. Only roundtrip=yes is needed here, if not present assume it's not a 
roundtrip. Note that many trails consist of a number of linear routes, together 
making for a roundtrip. I tag roundtrip=yes only on the parent route relation. 
Loop or circular would also be just fine, but I see no reason to change 
existing tagging here.

Question: who wants to know if a route is a circular route/loop/roundtrip? Is 
it the map user? No, (s)he can see it on the map. Is it important for routing 
and navigation? I can't see how, but there are experts on this list who know 
more about this. So far I know of only one application: 
categorisation/filtering of trips in order to present the user a choice between 
roundtrip walks or linear walks. The roundtrips were actually meant to be 
daytrips, and linear walks were to be presented as " long distance walks", but 
a separate category long distance roundtrips could be deducted from the data, I 
guess.

Question: who wants to know if a route is actually a closed loop without any 
branches?
What do you need this information for? So far, I know one application: if a 
route is tagged as a closed loop, e.g. with closed_loop=yes, and it's not 
complete or interrupted somewhere, you can detect that with a checking tool. It 
would be a sort of fixme, then. Most routes I maintain would not profit from 
that. 


FrGr Peter Elderson

> Op 21 dec. 2019 om 15:31 heeft marc marc  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> I always thought that routrip=yes was an alternative when there is no
> start and end point to enter in from=* to=* key.
> Otherwise circular routes with a known start/end point can enter
> as from=A via=B to=A.
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 21/12/19 21:25, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:

And with existing tags how you describe it?


I don't.


Il sab 21 dic 2019, 10:28 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> ha scritto:


On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:

Dear Volker,

I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:

Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are
at the same location.

I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and
it's fine for both definitions.
My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:

roundtrip:type=linear|circular

Do you agree?


No.

"Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???

As for the values .. you will need to define them!

'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both
directions .. and then separates into a loop where the segments
are only used in one direction.

I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one
direction and then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr
there is another  route that does that ...

So what values will there be to cover complex cases???



Francesco


Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt mailto:vosc...@gmail.com>> ha scritto:

Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any
other wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is
being used (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use,
not what the use should be) and in particular if there is a
more-than sporadic use of roundtrip=yes|no for anything else
than loop=yes|no.
It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
A fast overpass turbo wizard query
"type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
resulted in
Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
England:  25 lines, all loops.
USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of
all cycle route relations in these countries that have a
roundrip=yes are in fact loops and that that this is the
de-facto use of the tag.
I think this is a strong case against any change.

Taginfo points in the same direction
12665 roundtrip=no
21774 roundtrip=yes
42 closed_loop=yes
no closed_loop=no

Volker







On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli
mailto:franci...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In my opinion the options are:

- deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a
generally agreed naming convention (best at this point)
- keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition
I did change (relations must be updated accordingly)

I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point
out that is not a resolution because tag is currently
messed up

Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr
mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com>> ha scritto:

On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:

Merriam Webster and some other resources you have
quoted are dictionary for American English, not the
variant of English used by OSM. Posts by original
author of the topic on the wiki talk page have
explained the meaning of the term in British English.


The OED definitions read as follows:

Originally U.S.
 A. n.
 1.
 a. A journey to a place and back again, along
the same route; (also) a journey to one or more
places and back again which does not cover the
same ground twice, a circular tour or trip.

 b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.

 2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining
and Oil Industry) an act of withdrawing and
replacing a drill pipe.

 3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or
an instance of buying and selling the same stock,
commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf. round
turn n. 4.

 B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.

 1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various
senses). Cf. return n. Compounds 1.

 2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal
and figurative).

 C. adv. Chiefly North 

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[marc marc]

I always thought that routrip=yes was an alternative when there is no
start and end point to enter in from=* to=* key.
Otherwise circular routes with a known start/end point can enter
as from=A via=B to=A.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 at 14:43, Phake Nick  wrote:

> Reminder 1: There are loops within bus route doesn't mean the route is a
> circular or round trip route.
>
Fully agreed. That's why I am saying we need to alok at this with a bit of
calm. There plenty of diferent route toplogies

Reminder 2: The roundtrip=* key is designed to use in combination with
> hiking routes or bicycle routes. A hiking/bicyle route that goes A→B→A
> which come back with the same start point with exact same alignment as the
> other direction doesn't really mean anything so I don't think a special
> value would be needed for such case. As for bus routes, whether or not it
> goes back along same road doesn't really mean anything either.
>

Fully agreed.
We never looked at this and tagged different route types (bus and bicycle
for example) independently folowuìing essentially different topological
approaches.
Bus routes are (always?) tagged as unidirectional routes. The same bus line
that connects A <> B is represented by two bus routes A > B and B > A.
But, by tradition, or whatever reason, a topologically equivalent bicycle
route A <> B is represented by a single, mostly bidirectional route A <> B,
where the few pieces where the A > B route differs from the B > A route
(for example for roundabouts or cycle paths on both sides of a road) are
handled by route segments whose ways are tagged with role=forward|backward
within the relation.

By the way, these loop segments are, at least within the route network in
Italy, tagged with role=forward|backward differently from the definition in
the cycle routes wiki page

(" *Relation role*: Cycle routes sometimes have different paths depending
on the direction you are travelling. In this case, ways in the relation
should have a role of *forward* or *backward* as described in
Relation:route#Members
. The direction
is rendered on the cycle map (example

).")
in the sense that loop sections that are to be followed in the A > B
direction are marked with role=forward  and loop sections that are to be
ridden in the B > A direction are marked with role=backward.
But that is a different story that needs sorting out as well.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Phake Nick]

Reminder 1: There are loops within bus route doesn't mean the route is a
circular or round trip route.
Reminder 2: The roundtrip=* key is designed to use in combination with
hiking routes or bicycle routes. A hiking/bicyle route that goes A→B→A
which come back with the same start point with exact same alignment as the
other direction doesn't really mean anything so I don't think a special
value would be needed for such case. As for bus routes, whether or not it
goes back along same road doesn't really mean anything either.

在 2019年12月21日週六 17:28，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> 寫道：

> On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>
> Dear Volker,
>
> I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:
>
> Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the
> same location.
>
> I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's fine
> for both definitions.
> My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:
>
> roundtrip:type=linear|circular
>
> Do you agree?
>
>
> No.
>
> "Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???
>
> As for the values .. you will need to define them!
>
> 'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both directions ..
> and then separates into a loop where the segments are only used in one
> direction.
>
> I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one direction and
> then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr there is another  route
> that does that ...
>
> So what values will there be to cover complex cases???
>
>
> Francesco
>
>
> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>
>> Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
>> wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
>> What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used
>> (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should
>> be) and in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of
>> roundtrip=yes|no for anything else than loop=yes|no.
>> It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
>> A fast overpass turbo wizard query
>> "type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
>> Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
>> resulted in
>> Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
>> France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
>> England:  25 lines, all loops.
>> USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
>> Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
>> For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
>> route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
>> loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
>> I think this is a strong case against any change.
>>
>> Taginfo points in the same direction
>> 12665 roundtrip=no
>> 21774 roundtrip=yes
>> 42 closed_loop=yes
>> no closed_loop=no
>>
>> Volker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion the options are:
>>>
>>> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
>>> convention (best at this point)
>>> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
>>> (relations must be updated accordingly)
>>>
>>> I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not
>>> a resolution because tag is currently messed up
>>>
>>> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
>>> scritto:
>>>
 On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:

 Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
 for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
 original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
 meaning of the term in British English.


 The OED definitions read as follows:

 Originally U.S.
  A. n.
  1.
  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also) a
 journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the same
 ground twice, a circular tour or trip.

  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.

  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an
 act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.

  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of buying
 and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf.
 round turn n. 4.

  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.

  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
 Compounds 1.

  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).

  C. adv. Chiefly North American.

   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.

 Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
 American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.

 --
 Steve
 ___
>>>
>>>
>
> 

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il sab 21 dic 2019, 12:33 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:

> This is missing the point.
> I only want to point out that apparently roundtrip=yes without any
> additional tagging is being used as meaning "this route is a loop" and
> "round-trip=no" as meaning it's an A-to-b route. This should remain valid.
>

It is.
Well, with latest wiki version:
Roundtrip=yes is A to B (to C?) to A.
Roundtrip=no is A to B (to C?)

And let us consider how to cater for other cases.
>

Sure .. but if you're open to the change..

Any retagging would mean a lot of manual work. I cannot see any simple way
> (leaving out AI) to determine whether any given route is a loop or
> something else.
>


I feel this is the right approach...
We can define how to fix existing routes as soon as we find an eligible
approach


>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2019, 11:27 Francesco Ansanelli, 
> wrote:
>
>> And with existing tags how you describe it?
>>
>> Il sab 21 dic 2019, 10:28 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>
>>> On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Volker,
>>>
>>> I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:
>>>
>>> Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the
>>> same location.
>>>
>>> I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's fine
>>> for both definitions.
>>> My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:
>>>
>>> roundtrip:type=linear|circular
>>>
>>> Do you agree?
>>>
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> "Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???
>>>
>>> As for the values .. you will need to define them!
>>>
>>> 'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both directions
>>> .. and then separates into a loop where the segments are only used in one
>>> direction.
>>>
>>> I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one direction
>>> and then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr there is another
>>> route that does that ...
>>>
>>> So what values will there be to cover complex cases???
>>>
>>>
>>> Francesco
>>>
>>>
>>> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>>>
 Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
 wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
 What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used
 (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should
 be) and in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of
 roundtrip=yes|no for anything else than loop=yes|no.
 It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
 A fast overpass turbo wizard query
 "type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
 Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
 resulted in
 Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
 France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
 England:  25 lines, all loops.
 USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
 Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
 For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
 route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
 loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
 I think this is a strong case against any change.

 Taginfo points in the same direction
 12665 roundtrip=no
 21774 roundtrip=yes
 42 closed_loop=yes
 no closed_loop=no

 Volker






 On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
 wrote:

> In my opinion the options are:
>
> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed
> naming convention (best at this point)
> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
> (relations must be updated accordingly)
>
> I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is
> not a resolution because tag is currently messed up
>
> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
> scritto:
>
>> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>>
>> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are
>> dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM.
>> Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have 
>> explained
>> the meaning of the term in British English.
>>
>>
>> The OED definitions read as follows:
>>
>> Originally U.S.
>>  A. n.
>>  1.
>>  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also)
>> a journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the
>> same ground twice, a circular tour or trip.
>>
>>  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.
>>
>>  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an
>> act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.
>>
>>  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of
>> buying and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously.
>> 

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

This is missing the point.
I only want to point out that apparently roundtrip=yes without any
additional tagging is being used as meaning "this route is a loop" and
"round-trip=no" as meaning it's an A-to-b route. This should remain valid.
And let us consider how to cater for other cases.
Any retagging would mean a lot of manual work. I cannot see any simple way
(leaving out AI) to determine whether any given route is a loop or
something else.


On Sat, 21 Dec 2019, 11:27 Francesco Ansanelli,  wrote:

> And with existing tags how you describe it?
>
> Il sab 21 dic 2019, 10:28 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>> On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>>
>> Dear Volker,
>>
>> I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:
>>
>> Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the
>> same location.
>>
>> I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's fine
>> for both definitions.
>> My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:
>>
>> roundtrip:type=linear|circular
>>
>> Do you agree?
>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>> "Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???
>>
>> As for the values .. you will need to define them!
>>
>> 'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both directions
>> .. and then separates into a loop where the segments are only used in one
>> direction.
>>
>> I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one direction and
>> then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr there is another  route
>> that does that ...
>>
>> So what values will there be to cover complex cases???
>>
>>
>> Francesco
>>
>>
>> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>>
>>> Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
>>> wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
>>> What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used
>>> (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should
>>> be) and in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of
>>> roundtrip=yes|no for anything else than loop=yes|no.
>>> It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
>>> A fast overpass turbo wizard query
>>> "type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
>>> Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
>>> resulted in
>>> Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
>>> France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
>>> England:  25 lines, all loops.
>>> USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
>>> Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
>>> For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
>>> route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
>>> loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
>>> I think this is a strong case against any change.
>>>
>>> Taginfo points in the same direction
>>> 12665 roundtrip=no
>>> 21774 roundtrip=yes
>>> 42 closed_loop=yes
>>> no closed_loop=no
>>>
>>> Volker
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 In my opinion the options are:

 - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed
 naming convention (best at this point)
 - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
 (relations must be updated accordingly)

 I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not
 a resolution because tag is currently messed up

 Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
 scritto:

> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>
> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are
> dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM.
> Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained
> the meaning of the term in British English.
>
>
> The OED definitions read as follows:
>
> Originally U.S.
>  A. n.
>  1.
>  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also)
> a journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the
> same ground twice, a circular tour or trip.
>
>  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.
>
>  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an
> act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.
>
>  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of
> buying and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously.
> Cf. round turn n. 4.
>
>  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.
>
>  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
> Compounds 1.
>
>  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).
>
>  C. adv. Chiefly North American.
>
>   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.
>
> Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
> American phrase, 

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

And with existing tags how you describe it?

Il sab 21 dic 2019, 10:28 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>
> Dear Volker,
>
> I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:
>
> Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the
> same location.
>
> I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's fine
> for both definitions.
> My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:
>
> roundtrip:type=linear|circular
>
> Do you agree?
>
>
> No.
>
> "Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???
>
> As for the values .. you will need to define them!
>
> 'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both directions ..
> and then separates into a loop where the segments are only used in one
> direction.
>
> I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one direction and
> then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr there is another  route
> that does that ...
>
> So what values will there be to cover complex cases???
>
>
> Francesco
>
>
> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>
>> Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
>> wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
>> What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used
>> (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should
>> be) and in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of
>> roundtrip=yes|no for anything else than loop=yes|no.
>> It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
>> A fast overpass turbo wizard query
>> "type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
>> Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
>> resulted in
>> Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
>> France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
>> England:  25 lines, all loops.
>> USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
>> Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
>> For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
>> route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
>> loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
>> I think this is a strong case against any change.
>>
>> Taginfo points in the same direction
>> 12665 roundtrip=no
>> 21774 roundtrip=yes
>> 42 closed_loop=yes
>> no closed_loop=no
>>
>> Volker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion the options are:
>>>
>>> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
>>> convention (best at this point)
>>> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
>>> (relations must be updated accordingly)
>>>
>>> I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not
>>> a resolution because tag is currently messed up
>>>
>>> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
>>> scritto:
>>>
 On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:

 Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
 for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
 original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
 meaning of the term in British English.


 The OED definitions read as follows:

 Originally U.S.
  A. n.
  1.
  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also) a
 journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the same
 ground twice, a circular tour or trip.

  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.

  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an
 act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.

  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of buying
 and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf.
 round turn n. 4.

  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.

  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
 Compounds 1.

  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).

  C. adv. Chiefly North American.

   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.

 Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
 American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.

 --
 Steve
 ___
>>>
>>>
>
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 21/12/19 19:49, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:

Dear Volker,

I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:

Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the 
same location.


I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's 
fine for both definitions.

My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:

roundtrip:type=linear|circular

Do you agree?


No.

"Type" means nothing. Perhaps roundtrip:route=*???

As for the values .. you will need to define them!

'My' local bus route starts off with ways that are used both directions 
.. and then separates into a loop where the segments are only used in 
one direction.


I could imaging routes that have several loops  used in one direction 
and then ways that are used in both directions .. arrr there is another  
route that does that ...


So what values will there be to cover complex cases???



Francesco


Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt > ha scritto:


Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being
used (the wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the
use should be) and in particular if there is a more-than sporadic
use of roundtrip=yes|no for anything else than loop=yes|no.
It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
A fast overpass turbo wizard query
"type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
resulted in
Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
England:  25 lines, all loops.
USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all
cycle route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes
are in fact loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
I think this is a strong case against any change.

Taginfo points in the same direction
12665 roundtrip=no
21774 roundtrip=yes
42 closed_loop=yes
no closed_loop=no

Volker







On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli
mailto:franci...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In my opinion the options are:

- deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally
agreed naming convention (best at this point)
- keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I
did change (relations must be updated accordingly)

I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out
that is not a resolution because tag is currently messed up

Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com>> ha scritto:

On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:

Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted
are dictionary for American English, not the variant of
English used by OSM. Posts by original author of the
topic on the wiki talk page have explained the meaning of
the term in British English.


The OED definitions read as follows:

Originally U.S.
 A. n.
 1.
 a. A journey to a place and back again, along the
same route; (also) a journey to one or more places and
back again which does not cover the same ground twice,
a circular tour or trip.

 b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.

 2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and
Oil Industry) an act of withdrawing and replacing a
drill pipe.

 3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an
instance of buying and selling the same stock,
commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf. round turn
n. 4.

 B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.

 1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various
senses). Cf. return n. Compounds 1.

 2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and
figurative).

 C. adv. Chiefly North American.

  As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back
again.

Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North
American'. It's an American phrase, though now widely
adopted in the UK.

-- 
Steve

___




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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Dear Volker,

I saw that someone went ahead and changed the wiki again:

Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that start and end of a route are at the same
location.

I think this new definition matches your idea of roundtrip and it's fine
for both definitions.
My last offer is to abandon the closed_loop tag in favour of:

roundtrip:type=linear|circular

Do you agree?
Francesco


Il ven 20 dic 2019, 22:45 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:

> Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
> wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
> What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used (the
> wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should be) and
> in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of roundtrip=yes|no for
> anything else than loop=yes|no.
> It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
> A fast overpass turbo wizard query
> "type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
> Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
> resulted in
> Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
> France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
> England:  25 lines, all loops.
> USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
> Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
> For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
> route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
> loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
> I think this is a strong case against any change.
>
> Taginfo points in the same direction
> 12665 roundtrip=no
> 21774 roundtrip=yes
> 42 closed_loop=yes
> no closed_loop=no
>
> Volker
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
> wrote:
>
>> In my opinion the options are:
>>
>> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
>> convention (best at this point)
>> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
>> (relations must be updated accordingly)
>>
>> I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not a
>> resolution because tag is currently messed up
>>
>> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
>> scritto:
>>
>>> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>>>
>>> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
>>> for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
>>> original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
>>> meaning of the term in British English.
>>>
>>>
>>> The OED definitions read as follows:
>>>
>>> Originally U.S.
>>>  A. n.
>>>  1.
>>>  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also) a
>>> journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the same
>>> ground twice, a circular tour or trip.
>>>
>>>  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.
>>>
>>>  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an
>>> act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.
>>>
>>>  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of buying
>>> and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf.
>>> round turn n. 4.
>>>
>>>  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.
>>>
>>>  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
>>> Compounds 1.
>>>
>>>  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).
>>>
>>>  C. adv. Chiefly North American.
>>>
>>>   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.
>>>
>>> Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
>>> American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

Please revert the roundtrip wiki change, but let's put any other
wiki-changes on halt for a moment.
What we need to do is to find out how the roundtrip tag is being used (the
wiki is suposed to document the actual use, not what the use should be) and
in particular if there is a more-than sporadic use of roundtrip=yes|no for
anything else than loop=yes|no.
It's difficult to get reliable quantitative results, but:
A fast overpass turbo wizard query
"type:relation and route=bicycle and roundtrip=yes in
Italy|France|England|USA|Bayern"
resulted in
Italy: 58 lines with at best a handful of them not closed loops
France: 358 lines with maybe 10 non-loops
England:  25 lines, all loops.
USA:  29, about 6 non-loops
Bavaria 213, did not find any non-loops
For me this is a strong indication that the large majority of all cycle
route relations in these countries that have a roundrip=yes are in fact
loops and that that this is the de-facto use of the tag.
I think this is a strong case against any change.

Taginfo points in the same direction
12665 roundtrip=no
21774 roundtrip=yes
42 closed_loop=yes
no closed_loop=no

Volker






On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 18:17, Francesco Ansanelli 
wrote:

> In my opinion the options are:
>
> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
> convention (best at this point)
> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
> (relations must be updated accordingly)
>
> I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not a
> resolution because tag is currently messed up
>
> Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha
> scritto:
>
>> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>>
>> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
>> for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
>> original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
>> meaning of the term in British English.
>>
>>
>> The OED definitions read as follows:
>>
>> Originally U.S.
>>  A. n.
>>  1.
>>  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also) a
>> journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the same
>> ground twice, a circular tour or trip.
>>
>>  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.
>>
>>  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an act
>> of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.
>>
>>  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of buying
>> and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf.
>> round turn n. 4.
>>
>>  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.
>>
>>  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
>> Compounds 1.
>>
>>  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).
>>
>>  C. adv. Chiefly North American.
>>
>>   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.
>>
>> Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
>> American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

In my opinion the options are:

- deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
convention (best at this point)
- keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition I did change
(relations must be updated accordingly)

I read many of you asked a revert, I just want to point out that is not a
resolution because tag is currently messed up

Il ven 20 dic 2019, 15:08 Steve Doerr  ha scritto:

> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>
> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
> for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
> original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
> meaning of the term in British English.
>
>
> The OED definitions read as follows:
>
> Originally U.S.
>  A. n.
>  1.
>  a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route; (also) a
> journey to one or more places and back again which does not cover the same
> ground twice, a circular tour or trip.
>
>  b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.
>
>  2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry) an act
> of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.
>
>  3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of buying
> and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often simultaneously. Cf.
> round turn n. 4.
>
>  B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.
>
>  1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return n.
> Compounds 1.
>
>  2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).
>
>  C. adv. Chiefly North American.
>
>   As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.
>
> Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an
> American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.
>
> --
> Steve
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Steve Doerr]

On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are 
dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used by 
OSM. Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have 
explained the meaning of the term in British English.


The OED definitions read as follows:

   Originally U.S.
 A. n.
 1.
 a. A journey to a place and back again, along the same route;
   (also) a journey to one or more places and back again which does not
   cover the same ground twice, a circular tour or trip.

 b. Baseball. A home run. Cf. round-tripper n. 2.

 2. In extended use and figurative, esp. (Mining and Oil Industry)
   an act of withdrawing and replacing a drill pipe.

 3. Stock Market (originally U.S.). The action or an instance of
   buying and selling the same stock, commodity, etc., often
   simultaneously. Cf. round turn n. 4.

 B. adj. (attributive). Chiefly North American.

 1. Of or relating to a round trip (in various senses). Cf. return
   n. Compounds 1.

 2. That makes or has made a round trip (literal and figurative).

 C. adv. Chiefly North American.

  As a round trip; by travelling to a place and back again.

Note the frequent references to 'U.S.' and 'North American'. It's an 
American phrase, though now widely adopted in the UK.


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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 20/12/19 17:18, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:



Il ven 20 dic 2019, 01:16 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> ha scritto:


On 20/12/19 10:15, Chris Hill wrote:


I have been a native British English speaker for about sixty
years. A trip from A to B and then back to A, either on a fully
reversed route or an alternative route, would could be described
as a round trip. There is certainly no element of a curved or
looping route required to make it a round trip.



Nor is there anything in 'round trip' to exclude a curved circular
route. Would be interesting to find the origin of 'round trip'.


HTH

Chris

-- 
cheers

Chris Hill (chillly)
On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:

Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are
dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used
by OSM. Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk
page have explained the meaning of the term in British English.

在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli
mailto:franci...@gmail.com>> 寫道：



Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
> ha scritto:

On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the
closed loop proposal
> in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>
> Please let me know what you think
>

The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip'
could be a circular


I'm not a mother tongue but:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip


Definition of /round trip/

: a trip to a place and back usually over the same route



Oxford Dictionary (usually taken as a good source for UK English):
a journey to a place and back again

Nothing about 'over the same route'.


But also not the circular word...



https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip


A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the
same route.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip


round trip

noun

A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the
same route.
Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.

route that does not go from A to B and back along the
same route, it
could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such
your rewording is
wrong and does not match present use.

Revert your change.


How about a voting?



You may have done that before your change.


Sorry for being "rude"... When in Rome...


As I understand it you want to distinguish between routes that use
the same route to return to the same place compared to those
routes that return to the same place by a different route or at
least sections are different.
At present both of those are in OSMs 'roundtrip'. Would not this
information be obtained by looking at the route as mapped in OSM?


I think a tag may enforce it



So all the existing round trips will have to be deleted or re-tagged 
with something else .. as they may not meet this definition. I know the 
route I have tagged round trip doers not, so to avoid incorrect data 
they will all have to be deleted.
All the past editors who have learnt the old definition will probably 
continue to use it from the old definition - meaning errors will be 
constantly introduced.

The editors may have top be rejigged too.


Is there a need to add this information?



By that I mean renders may determine it for themselves using the OSM 
data? If so then this tag is of no real use.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip#loop

A bus that goes from A to B and returns 'using the same route' will have 
to turn around .. and that turning will not be using the same route .. 
so it does not meet a strict definition of 'using the same route'.


There are too many problems introduced by this new definition of roundtrip.

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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il ven 20 dic 2019, 01:16 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> On 20/12/19 10:15, Chris Hill wrote:
>
> I have been a native British English speaker for about sixty years. A trip
> from A to B and then back to A, either on a fully reversed route or an
> alternative route, would could be described as a round trip. There is
> certainly no element of a curved or looping route required to make it a
> round trip.
>
>
> Nor is there anything in 'round trip' to exclude a curved circular route.
> Would be interesting to find the origin of 'round trip'.
>
> HTH
>
> Chris
>
> --
> cheers
> Chris Hill (chillly)
>
> On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
>
> Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary
> for American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by
> original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the
> meaning of the term in British English.
>
> 在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli  寫道：
>
>>
>>
>> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>
>>> On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>>> > Dear List,
>>> >
>>> > I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
>>> > in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
>>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>>> >
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>>> >
>>> > Please let me know what you think
>>> >
>>>
>>> The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be a circular
>>>
>>
>> I'm not a mother tongue but:
>>
>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip
>> Definition of *round trip*
>> : a trip to a place and back usually over the same route
>>
>
> Oxford Dictionary (usually taken as a good source for UK English): a
> journey to a place and back again
>
> Nothing about 'over the same route'.
>

But also not the circular word...

>
>
> https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip
>>
>>
>> A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
>> https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip
>>
>> round trip
>>
>> noun
>> A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
>> Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.
>>
>> route that does not go from A to B and back along the same route, it
>>> could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your rewording is
>>> wrong and does not match present use.
>>>
>>> Revert your change.
>>>
>>
>> How about a voting?
>>
>
> You may have done that before your change.
>

Sorry for being "rude"... When in Rome...


> As I understand it you want to distinguish between routes that use the
> same route to return to the same place compared to those routes that return
> to the same place by a different route or at least sections are different.
> At present both of those are in OSMs 'roundtrip'. Would not this
> information be obtained by looking at the route as mapped in OSM?
>

I think a tag may enforce it

Is there a need to add this information?
>

If you split a segment in future a validator may say route with
closed_loop=yes not a loop...
A Roundtrip could be simply tagged and mapped in one direction in my opinion


>
>
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il ven 20 dic 2019, 04:21 Graeme Fitzpatrick  ha
scritto:

>
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 10:37, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> it’s in the “back again”, makes it likely you take the same way.
>>
>
> Sorry, Martin, not at all. I do a weekly round trip of ~38 klm - roughly
> 13 k down & 15 k back, mainly because I leave the Motorway at exit 92 but
> have to come back on at exit 95. & if the Motorway is too busy that day, I
> may well come home up the Highway, which will be 12 k home (but 15 minutes
> longer time), but it's still a "round trip"
>
> Also, what is the definition of "same way"?
>

I think that if your return change some way (how about a one way in
departure? You may not do the same segment literally) but it's almost the
same route, it's completely different from a loop...


> I travel down the southbound lanes of the Motorway & come back up the
> northern lanes, about 100 m's away from where I travelled down - is that
> the "same"?
>
>   Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

I think roundtrip is not about the route taken, but about the transport taking 
you somewhere, you do your thing there, then transport back to where you 
started. It's more like a service kind of thing. I don't use it when the 
relation shows exactly what the route is. I only find it useful to indicate 
that a route should be regarded as a roundtrip, even though the relation 
contains branches, excursions or shortcuts.

For hiking, a hiking route A to B waymarked in two directions is not a 
roundtrip. A hiking route ending where you started when you follow one 
direction all the time, may be seen as a roundtrip, because the 'transport' 
takes you back to back to to starting point. 

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 20 dec. 2019 om 04:21 heeft Graeme Fitzpatrick  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 10:37, Martin Koppenhoefer  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> it’s in the “back again”, makes it likely you take the same way.
> 
> Sorry, Martin, not at all. I do a weekly round trip of ~38 klm - roughly 13 k 
> down & 15 k back, mainly because I leave the Motorway at exit 92 but have to 
> come back on at exit 95. & if the Motorway is too busy that day, I may well 
> come home up the Highway, which will be 12 k home (but 15 minutes longer 
> time), but it's still a "round trip"
> 
> Also, what is the definition of "same way"? 
> 
> I travel down the southbound lanes of the Motorway & come back up the 
> northern lanes, about 100 m's away from where I travelled down - is that the 
> "same"?
> 
>   Thanks
> 
> Graeme
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 10:37, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> it’s in the “back again”, makes it likely you take the same way.
>

Sorry, Martin, not at all. I do a weekly round trip of ~38 klm - roughly 13
k down & 15 k back, mainly because I leave the Motorway at exit 92 but have
to come back on at exit 95. & if the Motorway is too busy that day, I may
well come home up the Highway, which will be 12 k home (but 15 minutes
longer time), but it's still a "round trip"

Also, what is the definition of "same way"?

I travel down the southbound lanes of the Motorway & come back up the
northern lanes, about 100 m's away from where I travelled down - is that
the "same"?

  Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 20/12/19 11:36, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 20. Dec 2019, at 01:16, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

Oxford Dictionary (usually taken as a good source for UK English): a journey to 
a place and back again


it’s in the “back again”, makes it likely you take the same way.


Why does it make it likely? I don't see it.

I think I have only used it on a public transport route.

In any event .. these properties could be determined using the ways that make 
up the route. So why is it necessary to tag it?
Is work being made for mappers that can be easily determined by the renders?



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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 20. Dec 2019, at 01:16, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Oxford Dictionary (usually taken as a good source for UK English): a journey 
> to a place and back again


it’s in the “back again”, makes it likely you take the same way. The word 
“Rundweg” which apparently was the concept that should have been defined (IIRC 
our former discussions about this topic) would not correctly be translated as 
roundtrip, despite the similar wording. Closed loop would have my support 
(although I also agree that it should generally be in the geometry of the 
route, personally I would not bother adding a special property for it, also 
because I am less interested in official start and end points or “checkpoints” 
in the middle)

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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 20/12/19 10:15, Chris Hill wrote:


I have been a native British English speaker for about sixty years. A 
trip from A to B and then back to A, either on a fully reversed route 
or an alternative route, would could be described as a round trip. 
There is certainly no element of a curved or looping route required to 
make it a round trip.




Nor is there anything in 'round trip' to exclude a curved circular 
route. Would be interesting to find the origin of 'round trip'.


HTH

Chris

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)
On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are 
dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used by 
OSM. Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have 
explained the meaning of the term in British English.


在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli > 寫道：




Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
> ha scritto:

On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed
loop proposal
> in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>
> Please let me know what you think
>

The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be
a circular


I'm not a mother tongue but:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip


Definition of /round trip/

: a trip to a place and back usually over the same route



Oxford Dictionary (usually taken as a good source for UK English): a 
journey to a place and back again


Nothing about 'over the same route'.


https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip


A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same
route.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip


round trip

noun

A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same
route.
Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.

route that does not go from A to B and back along the same
route, it
could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your
rewording is
wrong and does not match present use.

Revert your change.


How about a voting?



You may have done that before your change.

As I understand it you want to distinguish between routes that use the 
same route to return to the same place compared to those routes that 
return to the same place by a different route or at least sections are 
different.
At present both of those are in OSMs 'roundtrip'. Would not this 
information be obtained by looking at the route as mapped in OSM? Is 
there a need to add this information?




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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Chris Hill]

I have been a native British English speaker for about sixty years. A 
trip from A to B and then back to A, either on a fully reversed route or 
an alternative route, would could be described as a round trip. There is 
certainly no element of a curved or looping route required to make it a 
round trip.


HTH

Chris

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)

On 19/12/2019 22:48, Phake Nick wrote:
Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are 
dictionary for American English, not the variant of English used by 
OSM. Posts by original author of the topic on the wiki talk page have 
explained the meaning of the term in British English.


在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli > 寫道：




Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
> ha scritto:

On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed
loop proposal
> in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>
> Please let me know what you think
>

The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be a
circular


I'm not a mother tongue but:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip


Definition of /round trip/

: a trip to a place and back usually over the same route
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip


A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same
route.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip


round trip

noun

A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same
route.
Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.

route that does not go from A to B and back along the same
route, it
could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your
rewording is
wrong and does not match present use.

Revert your change.


How about a voting?


If you want to signify a route that goes from A to B and back
along the
same route invent another tag, roundtrip is not it.



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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Phake Nick]

Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary for
American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by original
author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the meaning of the
term in British English.

在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli  寫道：

>
>
> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>> On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
>> > Dear List,
>> >
>> > I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
>> > in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>> >
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>> >
>> > Please let me know what you think
>> >
>>
>> The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be a circular
>>
>
> I'm not a mother tongue but:
>
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip
> Definition of *round trip*
>
> : a trip to a place and back usually over the same route
> https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip
>
>
> A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
> https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip
>
> round trip
>
> noun
> A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
> Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.
>
> route that does not go from A to B and back along the same route, it
>> could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your rewording is
>> wrong and does not match present use.
>>
>> Revert your change.
>>
>
> How about a voting?
>
>
>> If you want to signify a route that goes from A to B and back along the
>> same route invent another tag, roundtrip is not it.
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il gio 19 dic 2019, 23:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> > Dear List,
> >
> > I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
> > in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
> >
> > Please let me know what you think
> >
>
> The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be a circular
>

I'm not a mother tongue but:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip
Definition of *round trip*

: a trip to a place and back usually over the same route
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/roundtrip


A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/round-trip

round trip

noun
A trip from one place to another and back, usually over the same route.
Idk if it's clearer why I tried to match the definition.

route that does not go from A to B and back along the same route, it
> could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your rewording is
> wrong and does not match present use.
>
> Revert your change.
>

How about a voting?


> If you want to signify a route that goes from A to B and back along the
> same route invent another tag, roundtrip is not it.
>
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Warin]

On 20/12/19 01:16, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:

Dear List,

I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal 
in order to address the misuse of the first tag:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes

Please let me know what you think



The word 'round' implies circular. So a 'roundtrip' could be a circular 
route that does not go from A to B and back along the same route, it 
could go A to B to C and then back to A via D. As such your rewording is 
wrong and does not match present use.


Revert your change.

If you want to signify a route that goes from A to B and back along the 
same route invent another tag, roundtrip is not it.


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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Peter Elderson]

If a route ends where it begins, it's a roundtrip, but you don't need to tag 
that because it's in the relation. The only thing I find useful is tagging 
roundtrip=yes when the route is not a true closed loop, but still catalogues 
for hikers as a roundtrip, even though it may have branches and shortcuts.

For automated checks closed_loop=yes might come in handy. If the tag is there 
but the route is not a true closed loop, it needs maintenance in OSM.

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 19 dec. 2019 om 22:40 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> 
> 
> sent from a phone
> 
>> On 19. Dec 2019, at 22:16, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>> 
>> you have changed the meaning of the tag from inluding the possibility of a 
>> loop to exluding it.
> 
> it may be too early to change definitions, but previous discussions have 
> shown that there was confusion about the roundtrip tag also before, and the 
> definition that start and end of the route have to be the same is also 
> satisfied with actual roundtrips (A-B and back).
> IMHO we should discourage the roundtrip tag altogether and establish 
> alternative tags for the cases that should be covered (loops and back and 
> forth or oneway) if they are required.
> 
> Cheers Martin 
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 19. Dec 2019, at 22:16, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> 
> you have changed the meaning of the tag from inluding the possibility of a 
> loop to exluding it.

it may be too early to change definitions, but previous discussions have shown 
that there was confusion about the roundtrip tag also before, and the 
definition that start and end of the route have to be the same is also 
satisfied with actual roundtrips (A-B and back).
IMHO we should discourage the roundtrip tag altogether and establish 
alternative tags for the cases that should be covered (loops and back and forth 
or oneway) if they are required.

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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 21:45, Francesco Ansanelli 
wrote:

>
>
> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 21:28 Phake Nick  ha scritto:
>
>> The current usage is that, "Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start
>> and finish of the route are at the same location". As in a route from Paris
>> to Milano to Frankfurt then back to Paris would be tagged as roundtrip=yes.
>> You have edited the wiki against established usage to make it become a no.
>> A word used as a key isn't perfect doesn't mean you can suddenly edit the
>> wiki to change its definition without regard of all the established usage
>> in the osm database.
>>
>
> The question is, current tagging respect original author intention?
> Unlucky Roundtrip change meaning between American and British English
> afaict.
> I've discussed also with another mapper and we agreed to fix wiki in order
> to avoid further misunderstandings.
>
>
>
>> 在 2019年12月20日週五 01:21，Francesco Ansanelli  寫道：
>>
>>> Dear Volker,
>>>
>>> I haven't change the meaning of Roundtrip, but just reworded to clarify
>>> it.
>>> Roundtrip yes is not a closed loop...
>>> Please check this discussion:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip#loop
>>>
>> Francesco,
you have changed the meaning of the tag from inluding the possibility of a
loop to exluding it. And I am aware of a number of (cycling) routes that
are loops and that are tagged with roundtrip=yes accordng to the previous
version of the wiki.
Please revert the wiki.

Furthermore with your new defintion practially or at least many cycle
routes are roundrip routes even though everyone would consdere them as
linear routes. Nearly all "linear" bicycle routes to which I contributed
can be ridden as roundtrip in the sense that they are signposted in both
directions, and care has been taken in those sections where the forward and
the backward route are different by using the foreward|backward roles. The
(fewer) routes with loop geometry as well can be ridden in either
direction.

Volker


>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Francesco
>>>
>>>
>>> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 15:40 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>>>
 Please relable your "roundtrip" proposal  as such.

 Please do not change the meaning of an established tag.
 roundtrip=yes|no is used about 34k times, based on a different definition,
 see
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Relations

 Volker

 On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 15:18, Francesco Ansanelli 
 wrote:

> Dear List,
>
> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
> in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>
> Please let me know what you think
>
> Many thanks
> Best regards
> Francesco
> ___
> 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
>>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il gio 19 dic 2019, 21:28 Phake Nick  ha scritto:

> The current usage is that, "Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start
> and finish of the route are at the same location". As in a route from Paris
> to Milano to Frankfurt then back to Paris would be tagged as roundtrip=yes.
> You have edited the wiki against established usage to make it become a no.
> A word used as a key isn't perfect doesn't mean you can suddenly edit the
> wiki to change its definition without regard of all the established usage
> in the osm database.
>

The question is, current tagging respect original author intention? Unlucky
Roundtrip change meaning between American and British English afaict.
I've discussed also with another mapper and we agreed to fix wiki in order
to avoid further misunderstandings.



> 在 2019年12月20日週五 01:21，Francesco Ansanelli  寫道：
>
>> Dear Volker,
>>
>> I haven't change the meaning of Roundtrip, but just reworded to clarify
>> it.
>> Roundtrip yes is not a closed loop...
>> Please check this discussion:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip#loop
>>
>> Cheers
>> Francesco
>>
>>
>> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 15:40 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>>
>>> Please relable your "roundtrip" proposal  as such.
>>>
>>> Please do not change the meaning of an established tag. roundtrip=yes|no
>>> is used about 34k times, based on a different definition, see
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Relations
>>>
>>> Volker
>>>
>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 15:18, Francesco Ansanelli 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Dear List,

 I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
 in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip

 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes

 Please let me know what you think

 Many thanks
 Best regards
 Francesco
 ___
 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
>>
> ___
> 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] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Phake Nick]

The current usage is that, "Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start
and finish of the route are at the same location". As in a route from Paris
to Milano to Frankfurt then back to Paris would be tagged as roundtrip=yes.
You have edited the wiki against established usage to make it become a no.
A word used as a key isn't perfect doesn't mean you can suddenly edit the
wiki to change its definition without regard of all the established usage
in the osm database.

在 2019年12月20日週五 01:21，Francesco Ansanelli  寫道：

> Dear Volker,
>
> I haven't change the meaning of Roundtrip, but just reworded to clarify it.
> Roundtrip yes is not a closed loop...
> Please check this discussion:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip#loop
>
> Cheers
> Francesco
>
>
> Il gio 19 dic 2019, 15:40 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:
>
>> Please relable your "roundtrip" proposal  as such.
>>
>> Please do not change the meaning of an established tag. roundtrip=yes|no
>> is used about 34k times, based on a different definition, see
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Relations
>>
>> Volker
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 15:18, Francesco Ansanelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear List,
>>>
>>> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal
>>> in order to address the misuse of the first tag:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>>>
>>> Please let me know what you think
>>>
>>> Many thanks
>>> Best regards
>>> Francesco
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Dear Volker,

I haven't change the meaning of Roundtrip, but just reworded to clarify it.
Roundtrip yes is not a closed loop...
Please check this discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip#loop

Cheers
Francesco


Il gio 19 dic 2019, 15:40 Volker Schmidt  ha scritto:

> Please relable your "roundtrip" proposal  as such.
>
> Please do not change the meaning of an established tag. roundtrip=yes|no
> is used about 34k times, based on a different definition, see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Relations
>
> Volker
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 15:18, Francesco Ansanelli 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear List,
>>
>> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal in
>> order to address the misuse of the first tag:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>>
>> Please let me know what you think
>>
>> Many thanks
>> Best regards
>> Francesco
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Roundtrip and closed loop in relations

[Volker Schmidt]

Please relable your "roundtrip" proposal  as such.

Please do not change the meaning of an established tag. roundtrip=yes|no is
used about 34k times, based on a different definition, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Relations

Volker

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 15:18, Francesco Ansanelli 
wrote:

> Dear List,
>
> I have updated the roundtrip page and created the closed loop proposal in
> order to address the misuse of the first tag:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:closed_loop=yes
>
> Please let me know what you think
>
> Many thanks
> Best regards
> Francesco
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Alan Grant]

>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 14:46:09 +0200
> From: Peter Elderson 
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>     
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
> Message-ID:
>  gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Nice to know.
> Do they have "trailheads" as well? That is, areas with amenities like
> parking space, bicycle clamps, toilets, guideposts, infoboards, ice  cream
> vending spot, waste containers, horse food dispenser, soda machines,
> blister service, ... well, some of of those anyway, clearly meant as
> starting/ending point of one or more trails? I'm told there are official
> trailheads in the United States, and we have those in Nederland as well,
> called TOP's.
>
>
In Ireland the only thing I would typically expect to find at the official
start point of a trail is an information board. The other things can be
found in some cases, but only if the trail starts somewhere that has these
amenities for other reasons (e.g. a park, castle or other tourist
attraction). I have never heard of a blister service! When I map hiking
trails I try to map the information board if there is one, as well as
mapping the relation. I often find the other amenities, if they exists,
have already been mapped by non-hikers.

I'd say it is pretty much the same in the south of Spain where I also hike
a bit, except for the famous Caminito del Rey where entry is controlled by
tickets with timed entry slots. This is truly a oneway route. It is not
just that the waymarks only point one way: it is actually prohibited to go
backwards. You enter by the northern end and are expected to emerge at the
southern end.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Nice to know.
Do they have "trailheads" as well? That is, areas with amenities like
parking space, bicycle clamps, toilets, guideposts, infoboards, ice  cream
vending spot, waste containers, horse food dispenser, soda machines,
blister service, ... well, some of of those anyway, clearly meant as
starting/ending point of one or more trails? I'm told there are official
trailheads in the United States, and we have those in Nederland as well,
called TOP's.

2018-05-28 13:02 GMT+02:00 Alan Grant :

>
>>
>> I agree that it sounds round, but looking at google results I find that
>> this use of circular route is extremely common.
>>
>>
> That doesn't surprise me in the context of hiking/cycling trails (I am not
> commenting on public transport). A specific example I am familiar with: the
> national organisation responsible for trails in the Republic of Ireland (
> irishtrails.ie) systematically labels trails as either "format: linear"
> or "format: circular". Its counterpart in Northern Ireland (walkni.com)
> similarly uses "route shape: linear" or "route shape: circular".
>
> Of course many of the linear trails are far from a geometric straight
> line, and the circular trails often do not resemble geometric circles.
> Readers are trusted to understand that "circular" means that if you follow
> the waymarks for the stated distance, you will return to the same point
> without backtracking on your own footsteps (or not much, often there may be
> a short section at the start that is covered in both directions). While
> "linear" means that if you walk the official distance you will end up some
> way from your start point. It may well be possible to return by the same
> route, but that would mean covering twice the official distance.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Alan Grant]

>
>
>
> I agree that it sounds round, but looking at google results I find that
> this use of circular route is extremely common.
>
>
That doesn't surprise me in the context of hiking/cycling trails (I am not
commenting on public transport). A specific example I am familiar with: the
national organisation responsible for trails in the Republic of Ireland (
irishtrails.ie) systematically labels trails as either "format: linear" or
"format: circular". Its counterpart in Northern Ireland (walkni.com)
similarly uses "route shape: linear" or "route shape: circular".

Of course many of the linear trails are far from a geometric straight line,
and the circular trails often do not resemble geometric circles. Readers
are trusted to understand that "circular" means that if you follow the
waymarks for the stated distance, you will return to the same point without
backtracking on your own footsteps (or not much, often there may be a short
section at the start that is covered in both directions). While "linear"
means that if you walk the official distance you will end up some way from
your start point. It may well be possible to return by the same route, but
that would mean covering twice the official distance.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 28. May 2018, at 11:04, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think 'circular' is the best word... implies round .. and at least 
> some are not round. 
> continuous_route?
> looped_route?


continuous is less clear, loop might be ok, but circular_route IMHO doesn’t 
imply a geometric circle, the same a round trip doesn’t describe a geometry 
that is „round“


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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Wiklund Johan]

AFAIK Transmodel uses these terms:

- Linear: A simple linear path from an origin stop to a destination stop. It 
may be exactly symmetric i.e. be
traversed to matching stop pairs in the outbound and inbound direction. Or 
asymmetric – with differences
in the stop sequences in each direction.
- Circular : A path that returns to the origin stop as the destination. It then 
may continue round repeatedly.
There may be symmetric or asymmetric services in the clockwise or anticlockwise 
direction. The
destinations shown for such routes may vary along the way.
- Lollipop: A path that goes round a loop one way at the outbound destination 
end and then returns past
the same stops on the inbound path.
- Cloverleaf: A path that returns repeatedly to the same stop.
- Branching: Alternate paths that go one or other alternative way at either end 
of the journey.
- Eye: Alternate paths that go one or other alternative way round an 
intermediate section of the route.

From: Warin [mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com]
Sent: mandag 28. mai 2018 11.04
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

I don't think 'circular' is the best word... implies round .. and at least some 
are not round.
continuous_route?
looped_route?



On 28/05/18 18:24, Peter Elderson wrote:
I think for waymarked circular trails the UK English meaning is not too far 
off. The waymarks and often available map/leaflet/booklet/description do indeed 
bring you back to the starting point. (Remember the walking_bus discussion?)

Having said that, I think circular_route is more to-the-point, it targets the 
route itself instead of the service. I have asked the Dutch community for input 
on retagging roundtrip=yes (for foot/hiking/cycling routes) to 
circular_route=yes, and using closed_loop=yes for the purpose of validation.

2018-05-28 10:01 GMT+02:00 Jo <winfi...@gmail.com<mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>>:
I only saw the discussion in this thread, came to the conclusion I (and 
probably many other Dutch and German speakers) had interpreted the meaning 
completely wrong.

The tag is indeed meaningless, as it stands. Especially for public transport, 
where it really doesn't matter. We're describing itineraries. For 
hiking/cycling it's a misnomer. So it would be good to phase it out.

What I'm trying to accomplish, while we're doing that is to not only replace it 
with circular_route, to indicate intent, but to also add a tag that validators 
can use to perform validation.

Jo

2018-05-28 9:54 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt 
<vosc...@gmail.com<mailto:vosc...@gmail.com>>:
Have you seen the discussion on the roundtrip tag [1]?
It looks as if there are two different roundtrip concepts in use:
For hiking or cycling routes it means that the route you follow brings you back 
to the starting point with the outwards route and the return route (mostly) 
different.
in a traffic service round trip is often used to indicate a service "there and 
back"
"roundtrip=yes|no" is an unfortunate choice of key as it has wo meanings, 
mainly ccording to which side of the Atlantic Ocean you are. but its in use 
about 25k times.
It might have been better to have something like "loop=yes|no" for hiking and 
cycling routes.
For bus|underground|tram lines it might have been better to use something like 
"geometry=linear|circular|..." for transportation routes.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip

On 28 May 2018 at 08:52, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com<mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>> 
wrote:
From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly understood and 
used wrongly by mappers.

It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger who buys 
a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying the return 
fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).

So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I changed 
needed major clean up in its members anyway.

So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that actually 
has meaning for itineraries?

I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user can expect 
(get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand it would be 
nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the relation are supposed 
to form a closed loop.

hence:
circular_route=yes
closed_loop=no

for that particular bus route.

Polyglot

2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 
<osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au<mailto:osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>>:
The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is: Does 
that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning of the 
same route again?

Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.

Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which case I 
would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I agree that it sounds round, but looking at google results I find that
this use of circular route is extremely common.

2018-05-28 11:04 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> I don't think 'circular' is the best word... implies round .. and at least
> some are not round.
> continuous_route?
> looped_route?
>
>
>
> On 28/05/18 18:24, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> I think for waymarked circular trails the UK English meaning is not too
> far off. The waymarks and often available map/leaflet/booklet/description
> do indeed bring you back to the starting point. (Remember the walking_bus
> discussion?)
>
> Having said that, I think circular_route is more to-the-point, it targets
> the route itself instead of the service. I have asked the Dutch community
> for input on retagging roundtrip=yes (for foot/hiking/cycling routes) to
> circular_route=yes, and using closed_loop=yes for the purpose of validation.
>
> 2018-05-28 10:01 GMT+02:00 Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>:
>
>> I only saw the discussion in this thread, came to the conclusion I (and
>> probably many other Dutch and German speakers) had interpreted the meaning
>> completely wrong.
>>
>> The tag is indeed meaningless, as it stands. Especially for public
>> transport, where it really doesn't matter. We're describing itineraries.
>> For hiking/cycling it's a misnomer. So it would be good to phase it out.
>>
>> What I'm trying to accomplish, while we're doing that is to not only
>> replace it with circular_route, to indicate intent, but to also add a tag
>> that validators can use to perform validation.
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> 2018-05-28 9:54 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Have you seen the discussion on the roundtrip tag [1]?
>>> It looks as if there are two different roundtrip concepts in use:
>>> For hiking or cycling routes it means that the route you follow brings
>>> you back to the starting point with the outwards route and the return route
>>> (mostly) different.
>>> in a traffic service round trip is often used to indicate a service
>>> "there and back"
>>> "roundtrip=yes|no" is an unfortunate choice of key as it has wo
>>> meanings, mainly ccording to which side of the Atlantic Ocean you are. but
>>> its in use about 25k times.
>>> It might have been better to have something like "loop=yes|no" for
>>> hiking and cycling routes.
>>> For bus|underground|tram lines it might have been better to use
>>> something like "geometry=linear|circular|..." for transportation routes.
>>>
>>> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip
>>>
>>> On 28 May 2018 at 08:52, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly
>>>> understood and used wrongly by mappers.
>>>>
>>>> It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger
>>>> who buys a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying
>>>> the return fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).
>>>>
>>>> So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I
>>>> changed needed major clean up in its members anyway.
>>>>
>>>> So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that
>>>> actually has meaning for itineraries?
>>>>
>>>> I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user
>>>> can expect (get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand
>>>> it would be nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the
>>>> relation are supposed to form a closed loop.
>>>>
>>>> hence:
>>>> circular_route=yes
>>>> closed_loop=no
>>>>
>>>> for that particular bus route.
>>>>
>>>> Polyglot
>>>>
>>>> 2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:
>>>>
>>>>> The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered,
>>>>> is: Does that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the
>>>>> beginning of the same route again?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Warin]

infi...@gmail.com
<mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>>
*Sent:* Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
*To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
            <tagging@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes
back to the same location. It's not circle shaped at
all, but that shouldn't matter for circular route.

I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with

circular_route=yes

closed_loop=no

If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop
would be yes. But the first and the last bus stops are
not exactly opposite one another.

Jo

2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson
<ba...@ursamundi.org <mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org>>:

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson
<pelder...@gmail.com <mailto:pelder...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it
has toilets and a tolerable coffee machine

Oh, you sweet, summer child. Someone's never tried
to take a suburban route in the US, even in a
"transit oriented" American city...


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


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



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




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




--
Vr gr Peter Elderson


___
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] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I think for waymarked circular trails the UK English meaning is not too far
off. The waymarks and often available map/leaflet/booklet/description do
indeed bring you back to the starting point. (Remember the walking_bus
discussion?)

Having said that, I think circular_route is more to-the-point, it targets
the route itself instead of the service. I have asked the Dutch community
for input on retagging roundtrip=yes (for foot/hiking/cycling routes) to
circular_route=yes, and using closed_loop=yes for the purpose of validation.

2018-05-28 10:01 GMT+02:00 Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>:

> I only saw the discussion in this thread, came to the conclusion I (and
> probably many other Dutch and German speakers) had interpreted the meaning
> completely wrong.
>
> The tag is indeed meaningless, as it stands. Especially for public
> transport, where it really doesn't matter. We're describing itineraries.
> For hiking/cycling it's a misnomer. So it would be good to phase it out.
>
> What I'm trying to accomplish, while we're doing that is to not only
> replace it with circular_route, to indicate intent, but to also add a tag
> that validators can use to perform validation.
>
> Jo
>
> 2018-05-28 9:54 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Have you seen the discussion on the roundtrip tag [1]?
>> It looks as if there are two different roundtrip concepts in use:
>> For hiking or cycling routes it means that the route you follow brings
>> you back to the starting point with the outwards route and the return route
>> (mostly) different.
>> in a traffic service round trip is often used to indicate a service
>> "there and back"
>> "roundtrip=yes|no" is an unfortunate choice of key as it has wo meanings,
>> mainly ccording to which side of the Atlantic Ocean you are. but its in use
>> about 25k times.
>> It might have been better to have something like "loop=yes|no" for hiking
>> and cycling routes.
>> For bus|underground|tram lines it might have been better to use something
>> like "geometry=linear|circular|..." for transportation routes.
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip
>>
>> On 28 May 2018 at 08:52, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly
>>> understood and used wrongly by mappers.
>>>
>>> It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger
>>> who buys a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying
>>> the return fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).
>>>
>>> So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I
>>> changed needed major clean up in its members anyway.
>>>
>>> So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that
>>> actually has meaning for itineraries?
>>>
>>> I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user can
>>> expect (get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand it
>>> would be nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the relation
>>> are supposed to form a closed loop.
>>>
>>> hence:
>>> circular_route=yes
>>> closed_loop=no
>>>
>>> for that particular bus route.
>>>
>>> Polyglot
>>>
>>> 2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:
>>>
>>>> The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is:
>>>> Does that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning
>>>> of the same route again?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which
>>>> case I would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1, and
>>>> you can remain on board during that time. A2 may be (but doesn’t have to)
>>>> an “exit only” and A1 and “entry only” stop).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If yes, then it is roundtrip=yes. And you shouldn’t just remove an
>>>> existing tag that actually applies.
>>>>
>>>> If no, then the roundtrip=yes is wrong and should be removed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
>>>> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and re

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

I only saw the discussion in this thread, came to the conclusion I (and
probably many other Dutch and German speakers) had interpreted the meaning
completely wrong.

The tag is indeed meaningless, as it stands. Especially for public
transport, where it really doesn't matter. We're describing itineraries.
For hiking/cycling it's a misnomer. So it would be good to phase it out.

What I'm trying to accomplish, while we're doing that is to not only
replace it with circular_route, to indicate intent, but to also add a tag
that validators can use to perform validation.

Jo

2018-05-28 9:54 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com>:

> Have you seen the discussion on the roundtrip tag [1]?
> It looks as if there are two different roundtrip concepts in use:
> For hiking or cycling routes it means that the route you follow brings you
> back to the starting point with the outwards route and the return route
> (mostly) different.
> in a traffic service round trip is often used to indicate a service "there
> and back"
> "roundtrip=yes|no" is an unfortunate choice of key as it has wo meanings,
> mainly ccording to which side of the Atlantic Ocean you are. but its in use
> about 25k times.
> It might have been better to have something like "loop=yes|no" for hiking
> and cycling routes.
> For bus|underground|tram lines it might have been better to use something
> like "geometry=linear|circular|..." for transportation routes.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip
>
> On 28 May 2018 at 08:52, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly
>> understood and used wrongly by mappers.
>>
>> It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger who
>> buys a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying the
>> return fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).
>>
>> So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I
>> changed needed major clean up in its members anyway.
>>
>> So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that
>> actually has meaning for itineraries?
>>
>> I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user can
>> expect (get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand it
>> would be nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the relation
>> are supposed to form a closed loop.
>>
>> hence:
>> circular_route=yes
>> closed_loop=no
>>
>> for that particular bus route.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> 2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:
>>
>>> The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is:
>>> Does that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning
>>> of the same route again?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which case
>>> I would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1, and you
>>> can remain on board during that time. A2 may be (but doesn’t have to) an
>>> “exit only” and A1 and “entry only” stop).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If yes, then it is roundtrip=yes. And you shouldn’t just remove an
>>> existing tag that actually applies.
>>>
>>> If no, then the roundtrip=yes is wrong and should be removed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
>>> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <
>>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes back to the same
>>> location. It's not circle shaped at all, but that shouldn't matter for
>>> circular route.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> circular_route=yes
>>>
>>> closed_loop=no
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop would be yes. But the
>>> first and the last bus stops are not exactly opposite one another.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.or

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Volker Schmidt]

Have you seen the discussion on the roundtrip tag [1]?
It looks as if there are two different roundtrip concepts in use:
For hiking or cycling routes it means that the route you follow brings you
back to the starting point with the outwards route and the return route
(mostly) different.
in a traffic service round trip is often used to indicate a service "there
and back"
"roundtrip=yes|no" is an unfortunate choice of key as it has wo meanings,
mainly ccording to which side of the Atlantic Ocean you are. but its in use
about 25k times.
It might have been better to have something like "loop=yes|no" for hiking
and cycling routes.
For bus|underground|tram lines it might have been better to use something
like "geometry=linear|circular|..." for transportation routes.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:roundtrip

On 28 May 2018 at 08:52, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly
> understood and used wrongly by mappers.
>
> It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger who
> buys a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying the
> return fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).
>
> So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I
> changed needed major clean up in its members anyway.
>
> So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that
> actually has meaning for itineraries?
>
> I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user can
> expect (get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand it
> would be nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the relation
> are supposed to form a closed loop.
>
> hence:
> circular_route=yes
> closed_loop=no
>
> for that particular bus route.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:
>
>> The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is:
>> Does that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning
>> of the same route again?
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which case
>> I would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1, and you
>> can remain on board during that time. A2 may be (but doesn’t have to) an
>> “exit only” and A1 and “entry only” stop).
>>
>>
>>
>> If yes, then it is roundtrip=yes. And you shouldn’t just remove an
>> existing tag that actually applies.
>>
>> If no, then the roundtrip=yes is wrong and should be removed.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
>> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>>
>>
>>
>> An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes back to the same
>> location. It's not circle shaped at all, but that shouldn't matter for
>> circular route.
>>
>>
>>
>> I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with
>>
>>
>>
>> circular_route=yes
>>
>> closed_loop=no
>>
>>
>>
>> If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop would be yes. But the
>> first and the last bus stops are not exactly opposite one another.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jo
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>:
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable
>> coffee machine
>>
>>
>>
>> Oh, you sweet, summer child.  Someone's never tried to take a suburban
>> route in the US, even in a "transit oriented" American city...
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

>From what I gathered during this discussion, roundtrip is mostly understood
and used wrongly by mappers.

It's also not something about the route, but rather about a passenger who
buys a ticket to come back the same way the same day/weekend and paying the
return fare on the same ticket (aller/retour - heen- en terug).

So I went and downloaded all objects tagged with roundtrip. The one I
changed needed major clean up in its members anyway.

So how do we get from a meaningless tag (roundtrip) to something that
actually has meaning for itineraries?

I think that on the one hand we need a tag to describe what the user can
expect (get back to approximate initial position) and on the other hand it
would be nice (for validation purposes) to know if the ways in the relation
are supposed to form a closed loop.

hence:
circular_route=yes
closed_loop=no

for that particular bus route.

Polyglot

2018-05-28 7:47 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:

> The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is:
> Does that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning
> of the same route again?
>
>
>
> Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.
>
>
>
> Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which case I
> would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1, and you
> can remain on board during that time. A2 may be (but doesn’t have to) an
> “exit only” and A1 and “entry only” stop).
>
>
>
> If yes, then it is roundtrip=yes. And you shouldn’t just remove an
> existing tag that actually applies.
>
> If no, then the roundtrip=yes is wrong and should be removed.
>
>
>
> *From:* Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes back to the same
> location. It's not circle shaped at all, but that shouldn't matter for
> circular route.
>
>
>
> I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with
>
>
>
> circular_route=yes
>
> closed_loop=no
>
>
>
> If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop would be yes. But the
> first and the last bus stops are not exactly opposite one another.
>
>
>
> Jo
>
>
>
>
>
> 2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>:
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable
> coffee machine
>
>
>
> Oh, you sweet, summer child.  Someone's never tried to take a suburban
> route in the US, even in a "transit oriented" American city...
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[osm.tagging]

The real question, which as far as I can tell you haven’t answered, is: Does 
that same vehicle, after completing its route, start at the beginning of the 
same route again?

 

Based on your description, the route as mapped is A1->B->C->D->E->A2.

 

Can I get on at E, stay on the vehicle, and get off at B? (In which case I 
would expect that after finishing at A2, the vehicle goes to A1, and you can 
remain on board during that time. A2 may be (but doesn’t have to) an “exit 
only” and A1 and “entry only” stop).

 

If yes, then it is roundtrip=yes. And you shouldn’t just remove an existing tag 
that actually applies.

If no, then the roundtrip=yes is wrong and should be removed.

 

From: Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> 
Sent: Monday, 28 May 2018 15:13
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes back to the same location. 
It's not circle shaped at all, but that shouldn't matter for circular route.

 

I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with

 

circular_route=yes

closed_loop=no

 

If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop would be yes. But the first 
and the last bus stops are not exactly opposite one another.

 

Jo

 

 

2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org 
<mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org> >:

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com 
<mailto:pelder...@gmail.com> > wrote:

I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable coffee 
machine

 

Oh, you sweet, summer child.  Someone's never tried to take a suburban route in 
the US, even in a "transit oriented" American city... 


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

 

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

An example of a (bus) route that goes out and comes back to the same
location. It's not circle shaped at all, but that shouldn't matter for
circular route.

I removed roundtrip=yes and replaced it with

circular_route=yes
closed_loop=no

If the last way wouldn't be in there, closed_loop would be yes. But the
first and the last bus stops are not exactly opposite one another.

Jo


2018-05-27 6:22 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson :

> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable
>> coffee machine
>>
>
> Oh, you sweet, summer child.  Someone's never tried to take a suburban
> route in the US, even in a "transit oriented" American city...
>
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable
> coffee machine
>

Oh, you sweet, summer child.  Someone's never tried to take a suburban
route in the US, even in a "transit oriented" American city...
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:23 AM,  wrote:

> I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s *
> *before** it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.
>

That's how I interpret it as well.  Tulsa Transit route 222 seems like a
good example of a roundtrip=yes situation, even if there's clockwise and
counterclockwise versions of the same route and it's usually more efficient
to wait for the opposite direction, since a full lap of that route is
somewhere around two hours.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[osm.tagging]

From: Philip Barnes  
Sent: Sunday, 27 May 2018 03:53



I enjoy linear walks from a to b as you can cover more ground, or at least more 
diverse ground, 2.pi.r and all that.

Generally they involve public transport for one of two parts but its still a 
round trip.

Bus from A to B, walk from B to C, train from C to A. If using trains you can 
even take your bike.



 

YOU are making a roundtrip, but the routes involved are not itself roundtrip 
routes. You are using multiple different linear routes (and most likely only 
parts of them in case of bus or train as it’s unlikely you ride them all from 
first to last stop in the relation).

 

A route relation marked as roundtrip means that you can join it at any stop (or 
for type of routes that don’t have stops at any point along the route) and if 
you keep following it (the last way segment should connect to the first way 
segment, so that you can “keep following it” by continuing at the first way 
segment when you reach the last way segment) you will get back to the point 
where you joined the route.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> Well, for PT I have no opinion whether tagging roundtrip is applicable.
> But how would you tag the London hop-on tours... Again, no opinion.
>

After having a quick look at some of them, then roundtrip is not
applicable.  I'm not sure without deeper inspection,
but they appear to be circulars.  Pretty much like an ordinary circular
except they're run by private companies
rather than TfL (or whatever it's called today) and using open-top
double-deckers.

I wonder how they've been mapped (if at all). :)



> For hiking & cycling it is important for data users to know if you return
> at the start when you just follow the waymarks. It's a major
> selection/ordering attribute for providers of waymarked walking routes.
> Location, distance, ends where it started (i.e. where your car is...),
> surface.
>

I'd guess (not being a hiker or cycler) that round trips are going to be
the common.  If not you're going to have to find
some way of getting back to your car.  I believe some of the walks around
here aren't round trips but in those cases
they end at some point on a bus route that takes you back to the start.  Of
course with those you do have the option
of walking back (I don't think any of them are one-way, and I believe that
it is possible to walk them without being
part of an organized group).


> Most users have a leaflet with a touristic impression of a map and the
> route, and location of parking lot and snackb^H^H^H^H^H^Hrestaurant. Often,
> you are not allowed to stray from the route.
>

I believe (without ever having looked too closely) that for most of the
walks around here you're left to your own
devices.  That was the impression I got from a map of the walks I
encountered unexpectedly whilst surveying:
it just shows the walks and gives a few details.  No explicit mention that
you're not allowed to leave the route,
people are expected to understand that could lead to them walking into
unsafe areas or being prosecuted for
trespass.

Start at the entrance, follow the Red Hobbit, tell us that it was heaven on
> earth. Thanks for visiting Nature Park "De Hoge Veluwe".  The white zone is
> for loading and unloading only... sorry. Frank Zappa kicked in.
>

Don't apologize for Zappa.  We could do with him now.  He'd probably die
from overwork because he'd have to
record a new track every day just to keep up.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Philip Barnes]

I enjoy linear walks from a to b as you can cover more ground, or at least more 
diverse ground, 2.pi.r and all that.

Generally they involve public transport for one of two parts but its still a 
round trip.

Bus from A to B, walk from B to C, train from C to A. If using trains you can 
even take your bike.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 26 May 2018 17:16:09 BST, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>I do a lot of one-day walking trips with groups... they actually fit
>quite
>nicely with your descriptions. The route usually ends where it starts.
>You
>have a fixed order of POI's, one or more planned stops at fixed
>locations,
>and they (the others or the group leader) get upset when someone is not
>ready when the groups is supposed to go on or return.  The route maybe
>linear or circular, often a combination: start linear, then a tour,
>then
>return the same way you came.
>
>None of this is absolutely fixed, but that's the same with your
>description, it contains a lot of "may"s
>
>If someone decides to do the same touring car route in her own car,
>wouldn't  you still call it a round trip?
>
>2018-05-26 17:16 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :
>
>>
>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Peter Elderson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Still thinking...
>>> If in British English round trip just means you start at A, go to B,
>do
>>> all kinds of things in between or not, then later return at A, no
>matter if
>>> it's via the same route or a different route, as long as it's in one
>go:
>>> then a waymarked "circular" foot or bicycle route actually fits the
>>> definition.
>>>
>>
>> Not really.  On a circular A->B->C->D->E->F->A->B->C... I can get on
>at
>> any point and go to any other.  Ticketing
>> restrictions may mean I cannot go around past the same point twice.
>> Ticketing restrictions may mean if there's
>> a reverse of the route then I can't go A->B->C->D->E->F but must take
>the
>> reverse route F->A.
>>
>> On sight-seeing tours which are round trips, it may not be
>permissible to
>> get on or off at any point other than A,
>> in fact the bus may not even stop at any POI. On more general tourist
>> round trips, it may be possible to get off some
>> POIs but you must return (otherwise they hang around thinking you've
>> gotten lost) and it may not be permissible to
>> board at any point other than A.  The round trip may be linear rather
>than
>> circular (they usually are circular so that
>> you get to see more POIs, but in the case of an "excursion" the
>intent is
>> to get from A to B, spend time at B, then
>> return.  Different from an ordinary route because they get upset if
>you
>> don't return to the bus at the allotted time
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Vr gr Peter Elderson

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Well, for PT I have no opinion whether tagging roundtrip is applicable. But
how would you tag the London hop-on tours... Again, no opinion.

For hiking & cycling it is important for data users to know if you return
at the start when you just follow the waymarks. It's a major
selection/ordering attribute for providers of waymarked walking routes.
Location, distance, ends where it started (i.e. where your car is...),
surface.
Most users have a leaflet with a touristic impression of a map and the
route, and location of parking lot and snackb^H^H^H^H^H^Hrestaurant. Often,
you are not allowed to stray from the route. Start at the entrance, follow
the Red Hobbit, tell us that it was heaven on earth. Thanks for visiting
Nature Park "De Hoge Veluwe".  The white zone is for loading and unloading
only... sorry. Frank Zappa kicked in.

2018-05-26 18:45 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> I do a lot of one-day walking trips with groups... they actually fit
>> quite nicely with your descriptions. The route usually ends where it
>> starts. You have a fixed order of POI's, one or more planned stops at fixed
>> locations, and they (the others or the group leader) get upset when someone
>> is not ready when the groups is supposed to go on or return.  The route
>> maybe linear or circular, often a combination: start linear, then a tour,
>> then return the same way you came.
>>
>> None of this is absolutely fixed, but that's the same with your
>> description, it contains a lot of "may"s
>>
>
> It does indeed sound like a round trip by my definitions.  It is not
> intended that people drop out of the walk at
> random locations or that they choose to stop at an arbitrary point and not
> return to the origin.
>
>>
>> If someone decides to do the same touring car route in her own car,
>> wouldn't  you still call it a round trip?
>>
>
> In intent, yes.  Of course, with your own car you can always change your
> mind anywhere along the route
> and go home, or go somewhere else.
>
> I would expect that even on a round-trip with no stops, such as a scenic
> tour bus, if somebody caused
> enough trouble they might be ejected.  Or, by pre-arrangement somebody
> might be permitted to get off
> at a place it normally stops.
>
> Whether or not any of these things are important to map is another
> matter.  But it's better if our
> terminology matches British English expectations at minimum (the more
> language expectations
> it matches the better) because people don't always look at the wiki to
> check if they're using a tag
> correctly.  The closer a tag matches normal usage the less likely it will
> be used incorrectly.
>
> So once we're agreed what these things mean we can decide if they're worth
> mapping. :)
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> I do a lot of one-day walking trips with groups... they actually fit quite
> nicely with your descriptions. The route usually ends where it starts. You
> have a fixed order of POI's, one or more planned stops at fixed locations,
> and they (the others or the group leader) get upset when someone is not
> ready when the groups is supposed to go on or return.  The route maybe
> linear or circular, often a combination: start linear, then a tour, then
> return the same way you came.
>
> None of this is absolutely fixed, but that's the same with your
> description, it contains a lot of "may"s
>

It does indeed sound like a round trip by my definitions.  It is not
intended that people drop out of the walk at
random locations or that they choose to stop at an arbitrary point and not
return to the origin.

>
> If someone decides to do the same touring car route in her own car,
> wouldn't  you still call it a round trip?
>

In intent, yes.  Of course, with your own car you can always change your
mind anywhere along the route
and go home, or go somewhere else.

I would expect that even on a round-trip with no stops, such as a scenic
tour bus, if somebody caused
enough trouble they might be ejected.  Or, by pre-arrangement somebody
might be permitted to get off
at a place it normally stops.

Whether or not any of these things are important to map is another matter.
But it's better if our
terminology matches British English expectations at minimum (the more
language expectations
it matches the better) because people don't always look at the wiki to
check if they're using a tag
correctly.  The closer a tag matches normal usage the less likely it will
be used incorrectly.

So once we're agreed what these things mean we can decide if they're worth
mapping. :)

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I do a lot of one-day walking trips with groups... they actually fit quite
nicely with your descriptions. The route usually ends where it starts. You
have a fixed order of POI's, one or more planned stops at fixed locations,
and they (the others or the group leader) get upset when someone is not
ready when the groups is supposed to go on or return.  The route maybe
linear or circular, often a combination: start linear, then a tour, then
return the same way you came.

None of this is absolutely fixed, but that's the same with your
description, it contains a lot of "may"s

If someone decides to do the same touring car route in her own car,
wouldn't  you still call it a round trip?

2018-05-26 17:16 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

>
> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> Still thinking...
>> If in British English round trip just means you start at A, go to B, do
>> all kinds of things in between or not, then later return at A, no matter if
>> it's via the same route or a different route, as long as it's in one go:
>> then a waymarked "circular" foot or bicycle route actually fits the
>> definition.
>>
>
> Not really.  On a circular A->B->C->D->E->F->A->B->C... I can get on at
> any point and go to any other.  Ticketing
> restrictions may mean I cannot go around past the same point twice.
> Ticketing restrictions may mean if there's
> a reverse of the route then I can't go A->B->C->D->E->F but must take the
> reverse route F->A.
>
> On sight-seeing tours which are round trips, it may not be permissible to
> get on or off at any point other than A,
> in fact the bus may not even stop at any POI. On more general tourist
> round trips, it may be possible to get off some
> POIs but you must return (otherwise they hang around thinking you've
> gotten lost) and it may not be permissible to
> board at any point other than A.  The round trip may be linear rather than
> circular (they usually are circular so that
> you get to see more POIs, but in the case of an "excursion" the intent is
> to get from A to B, spend time at B, then
> return.  Different from an ordinary route because they get upset if you
> don't return to the bus at the allotted time
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> Still thinking...
> If in British English round trip just means you start at A, go to B, do
> all kinds of things in between or not, then later return at A, no matter if
> it's via the same route or a different route, as long as it's in one go:
> then a waymarked "circular" foot or bicycle route actually fits the
> definition.
>

Not really.  On a circular A->B->C->D->E->F->A->B->C... I can get on at any
point and go to any other.  Ticketing
restrictions may mean I cannot go around past the same point twice.
Ticketing restrictions may mean if there's
a reverse of the route then I can't go A->B->C->D->E->F but must take the
reverse route F->A.

On sight-seeing tours which are round trips, it may not be permissible to
get on or off at any point other than A,
in fact the bus may not even stop at any POI. On more general tourist round
trips, it may be possible to get off some
POIs but you must return (otherwise they hang around thinking you've gotten
lost) and it may not be permissible to
board at any point other than A.  The round trip may be linear rather than
circular (they usually are circular so that
you get to see more POIs, but in the case of an "excursion" the intent is
to get from A to B, spend time at B, then
return.  Different from an ordinary route because they get upset if you
don't return to the bus at the allotted time

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> If I understand you correctly, in British English round trip is not about
> the route at all, it is about the journey, the service and practical
> arrangements. While American English adds the actual route and the priceing.
>

Something like that.  The actual route taken on a round trip is an
important factor in describing it, and of interest
to a person on the trip, but doesn't determine whether it is or isn't
considered a round trip.


>
> To me, this means that the roundtrip key (if at all useful) is not
> applicable to other routes than PT and tourism vehicle routes and services.
> And that it does not mean anything when applied to waymarked hiking,
> bikeing etc routes.
>

That seems to be the case.  Others might have differing opinions, but I
don't see it as applicable to hiking/biking.  Oh,
it is applicable to tourist boats, which mostly operate round trips.  It's
rare for them to set down or pick up at sea. :)  The
tourist boat operating in my point has two pick-up points (three in summer)
on a circular route, where the pick-up points
are on a very short segment of the route.  I'd call it a round trip rather
than a circular, even though it has elements of
both.


> Those routes need to know if the waymarking is oneway and if it's a
> circular route, meaning when you keep going you will end up where (or near
> to) you began, no matter where on the route you started.
>

That seems right to me.  Again, with a non-circular route you can (possibly
requiring a change of vehicles at
one point) get back to where you started.  The best distinction I can come
up with is that circular routes enclose
an area and non-circular routes do not.  And that distinction often has
exceptions because of one-way systems.
Some of those are going to be hard to decide.  It depends what proportion
of the route is along the same ways in
opposite directions and what proportion uses different ways (a significant
distance apart) for the two directions.
A good rule of thumb is if the bus company says the route is a circular
then it is, otherwise use your judgement. :)

As always, there will be grey areas and exceptions, but that seems to cover
most cases.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Still thinking...
If in British English round trip just means you start at A, go to B, do all
kinds of things in between or not, then later return at A, no matter if
it's via the same route or a different route, as long as it's in one go:
then a waymarked "circular" foot or bicycle route actually fits the
definition.

2018-05-26 15:58 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> If I understand you correctly, in British English round trip is not about
> the route at all, it is about the journey, the service and practical
> arrangements. While American English adds the actual route and the priceing.
>
> To me, this means that the roundtrip key (if at all useful) is not
> applicable to other routes than PT and tourism vehicle routes and services.
> And that it does not mean anything when applied to waymarked hiking,
> bikeing etc routes.
> Those routes need to know if the waymarking is oneway and if it's a
> circular route, meaning when you keep going you will end up where (or near
> to) you began, no matter where on the route you started.
>
>
> 2018-05-26 14:53 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :
>
>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Peter Elderson 
>> wrote:
>>
>> When applied to a route, I would leave out that it is the same vehicle,
>>> because when you book or buy a round trip, most of the time you have a
>>> different vehicle for the return trip.
>>>
>>
>> You've strayed into the territory between British and American English.
>> It's important because OSM English
>> is (largely) a dialect of British English.  In British English there is a
>> distinction between round trips and returns, in
>> American English there isn't.  Circulars are yet another thing.
>>
>> In British English a round trip is from A to A, on the same vehicle
>> (exception: vehicle breakdowns).  In
>> the case of sightseeing tours and boat trips, it may not be possible (or
>> permitted) to alight and disembark at
>> any point but A.  A return is applied to tickets: a return ticket is
>> valid for a journey from A to B and a journey from B to A,
>> often on the same day but sometimes valid for longer than a single day.
>> You might come back on the same vehicle
>> and even stay at B for only as long as it takes for the vehicle to turn
>> around.  Or you might come back on a different
>> vehicle.  You might come back via a different route with a different
>> service number (if permitted).  A return ticket is
>> (usually) cheaper than two single tickets.
>>
>> Returns are basically about pricing and shouldn't be mapped.  Round trips
>> are about a journey that takes you from
>> A to A, which might happen to pass some interesting things and may even
>> lay over for several minutes to allow you
>> to get off, have a quick look, then get back on.
>>
>> Example: I get a bus to work.  I buy a return ticket because it's
>> cheaper.  I get a bus home 8 hours later.  It
>> may or may not be the same vehicle.  It may or may not be the same
>> driver.  It may take a different route if
>> there are variant routes.  I may be permitted to use a different service
>> with possibly a different route between
>> home and work.  It's not, in British English, a round trip.  I don't have
>> to buy a return ticket, or there may be a weekly
>> ticket, or I may get a lift home (if I regularly get a lift home I'd buy
>> a single rather than a return).
>>
>> Example: I get on a tour bus.  It stops at various places to give people
>> 30 minutes to look around.  It eventually
>> takes me back to the starting point.  It doesn't pick up additional
>> passengers along the way and it doesn't
>> permit people to get off at some point and not get back on (at least not
>> without some sort of prearrangement).
>> It is, in British English, a round trip.
>>
>> Yes, there are always grey areas and exceptions, but those are the common
>> cases.
>>
>> Although you may not be interested vehicle changes, they are one of the
>> main characteristics differentiating a round
>> trip from an ordinary route.  By your proposal just about all bus routes
>> are round trips, which is not a useful
>> distinction, because there are very few routes which are not round trips
>> by your proposal.
>>
>> How much of this ought to be tagged, and how, is another matter. :)
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

If I understand you correctly, in British English round trip is not about
the route at all, it is about the journey, the service and practical
arrangements. While American English adds the actual route and the priceing.

To me, this means that the roundtrip key (if at all useful) is not
applicable to other routes than PT and tourism vehicle routes and services.
And that it does not mean anything when applied to waymarked hiking,
bikeing etc routes.
Those routes need to know if the waymarking is oneway and if it's a
circular route, meaning when you keep going you will end up where (or near
to) you began, no matter where on the route you started.


2018-05-26 14:53 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
> When applied to a route, I would leave out that it is the same vehicle,
>> because when you book or buy a round trip, most of the time you have a
>> different vehicle for the return trip.
>>
>
> You've strayed into the territory between British and American English.
> It's important because OSM English
> is (largely) a dialect of British English.  In British English there is a
> distinction between round trips and returns, in
> American English there isn't.  Circulars are yet another thing.
>
> In British English a round trip is from A to A, on the same vehicle
> (exception: vehicle breakdowns).  In
> the case of sightseeing tours and boat trips, it may not be possible (or
> permitted) to alight and disembark at
> any point but A.  A return is applied to tickets: a return ticket is valid
> for a journey from A to B and a journey from B to A,
> often on the same day but sometimes valid for longer than a single day.
> You might come back on the same vehicle
> and even stay at B for only as long as it takes for the vehicle to turn
> around.  Or you might come back on a different
> vehicle.  You might come back via a different route with a different
> service number (if permitted).  A return ticket is
> (usually) cheaper than two single tickets.
>
> Returns are basically about pricing and shouldn't be mapped.  Round trips
> are about a journey that takes you from
> A to A, which might happen to pass some interesting things and may even
> lay over for several minutes to allow you
> to get off, have a quick look, then get back on.
>
> Example: I get a bus to work.  I buy a return ticket because it's
> cheaper.  I get a bus home 8 hours later.  It
> may or may not be the same vehicle.  It may or may not be the same
> driver.  It may take a different route if
> there are variant routes.  I may be permitted to use a different service
> with possibly a different route between
> home and work.  It's not, in British English, a round trip.  I don't have
> to buy a return ticket, or there may be a weekly
> ticket, or I may get a lift home (if I regularly get a lift home I'd buy a
> single rather than a return).
>
> Example: I get on a tour bus.  It stops at various places to give people
> 30 minutes to look around.  It eventually
> takes me back to the starting point.  It doesn't pick up additional
> passengers along the way and it doesn't
> permit people to get off at some point and not get back on (at least not
> without some sort of prearrangement).
> It is, in British English, a round trip.
>
> Yes, there are always grey areas and exceptions, but those are the common
> cases.
>
> Although you may not be interested vehicle changes, they are one of the
> main characteristics differentiating a round
> trip from an ordinary route.  By your proposal just about all bus routes
> are round trips, which is not a useful
> distinction, because there are very few routes which are not round trips
> by your proposal.
>
> How much of this ought to be tagged, and how, is another matter. :)
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

we are now mostly speaking about bus routes, but this property could also be 
interesting for walking and cycling routes.


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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Peter Elderson 
wrote:

When applied to a route, I would leave out that it is the same vehicle,
> because when you book or buy a round trip, most of the time you have a
> different vehicle for the return trip.
>

You've strayed into the territory between British and American English.
It's important because OSM English
is (largely) a dialect of British English.  In British English there is a
distinction between round trips and returns, in
American English there isn't.  Circulars are yet another thing.

In British English a round trip is from A to A, on the same vehicle
(exception: vehicle breakdowns).  In
the case of sightseeing tours and boat trips, it may not be possible (or
permitted) to alight and disembark at
any point but A.  A return is applied to tickets: a return ticket is valid
for a journey from A to B and a journey from B to A,
often on the same day but sometimes valid for longer than a single day.
You might come back on the same vehicle
and even stay at B for only as long as it takes for the vehicle to turn
around.  Or you might come back on a different
vehicle.  You might come back via a different route with a different
service number (if permitted).  A return ticket is
(usually) cheaper than two single tickets.

Returns are basically about pricing and shouldn't be mapped.  Round trips
are about a journey that takes you from
A to A, which might happen to pass some interesting things and may even lay
over for several minutes to allow you
to get off, have a quick look, then get back on.

Example: I get a bus to work.  I buy a return ticket because it's cheaper.
I get a bus home 8 hours later.  It
may or may not be the same vehicle.  It may or may not be the same driver.
It may take a different route if
there are variant routes.  I may be permitted to use a different service
with possibly a different route between
home and work.  It's not, in British English, a round trip.  I don't have
to buy a return ticket, or there may be a weekly
ticket, or I may get a lift home (if I regularly get a lift home I'd buy a
single rather than a return).

Example: I get on a tour bus.  It stops at various places to give people 30
minutes to look around.  It eventually
takes me back to the starting point.  It doesn't pick up additional
passengers along the way and it doesn't
permit people to get off at some point and not get back on (at least not
without some sort of prearrangement).
It is, in British English, a round trip.

Yes, there are always grey areas and exceptions, but those are the common
cases.

Although you may not be interested vehicle changes, they are one of the
main characteristics differentiating a round
trip from an ordinary route.  By your proposal just about all bus routes
are round trips, which is not a useful
distinction, because there are very few routes which are not round trips by
your proposal.

How much of this ought to be tagged, and how, is another matter. :)

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

> A vehicle that goes from A
> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
> English to perform a "round trip".

When applied to a route, I would leave out that it is the same vehicle,
because when you book or buy a round trip, most of the time you have a
different vehicle for the return trip. I also would leave out any ticketing
or boarding/unboarding arrangements. Whether or not the tag is useful in
this meaning in defferent context, I don't know.
I can think of situations where a part of a hiking, biking or ice-skating
route (we Dutch all go to work on ice skates, everybody knows that...) is a
roundtrip branch attached to a oneway "circular" part, but what would
tagging it as such accomplish? Anyway, don't need to prescribe that now.

I've seen the term circular route many times to indicate what we are
talking about. Other geometrics, not so much. 8-shaped, sometimes.That's
it. I don't think the risk is that great.
You would prefer circular_route=yes|no to replace the current erroneous use
of roundtrip=yes|no)? Or something completely different? Or are you saying
it shouldn't be retagged at all?

2018-05-26 13:20 GMT+02:00 marc marc :

> Le 26. 05. 18 à 12:10, Peter Elderson a écrit :
> > the correct meaning
>
> considering the great diversity of interpretation of this tag,
> what is in your opinion the correct meaning?
> when should roundtrip changed in circular ?
> and when not ?
>
> > route:circular=yes
>
> with this kind of key, I have the impression that it will not be long
> before triangular roads, linear roads, arcuate roads appear, in short
> that it moves us completely away from the original idea
> and therefore the new key will be totally useless
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I'm good with that if there is no major objection.

2018-05-26 12:45 GMT+02:00 Jo :

> For validation purposes it would be interesting to know if the ways in the
> route relation are supposed to form a closed loop. Can we adopt
> closed_loop=yes for that use case?
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2018-05-26 12:10 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :
>
>> I would like to wrap this up, without a formal proposal process, if there
>> is no fundamental objection.
>> Afterwards, I will announce it in the Dutch community and arrange the
>> re-tagging of existing usage.
>>
>> I suggest:
>>
>> * Update the wiki page for key: roundtrip, to reflect the correct
>> meaning, and advize to use circular_route=yes or route:circular=yes
>> (2Bdecided). Whether or not the redefined key:roundtrip is still useful or
>> should be deprecated, can be decided later. It does not matter to me, at
>> this point.
>>
>> * Add a page for the new key:circular_route=yes|no or
>> route:circular=yes|no, to indicate that a route is to be regarded as
>> circular/linear (no matter if it's a closed route on the map or not).
>>
>> If other route variants are foreseen, maybe route:circular=yes|no is
>> better?
>>
>> Details about context and use cases can be added and modified through the
>> talk-pages.
>>
>> Allright?
>>
>> 2018-05-25 23:46 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> On 25/05/18 21:31, Peter Elderson wrote:
>>>
>>> It's an example. But we are not alone...
>>>
>>>
>>> Same in Sydney Australia - billed on entry and exit points .. not on how
>>> long you have been inside the  transport system system.
>>> Some 'homeless' use it as a warm dry resting place, doing long round
>>> trips.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2018-05-25 12:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>>>
 2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
> chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled 
> between
> check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?
>


 isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing can
 deal with roundtrips or not?

 Cheers,
 Martin

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


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing 
>>> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[marc marc]

Le 26. 05. 18 à 12:10, Peter Elderson a écrit :
> the correct meaning

considering the great diversity of interpretation of this tag,
what is in your opinion the correct meaning?
when should roundtrip changed in circular ?
and when not ?

> route:circular=yes

with this kind of key, I have the impression that it will not be long 
before triangular roads, linear roads, arcuate roads appear, in short 
that it moves us completely away from the original idea
and therefore the new key will be totally useless

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

For validation purposes it would be interesting to know if the ways in the
route relation are supposed to form a closed loop. Can we adopt
closed_loop=yes for that use case?

Polyglot

2018-05-26 12:10 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> I would like to wrap this up, without a formal proposal process, if there
> is no fundamental objection.
> Afterwards, I will announce it in the Dutch community and arrange the
> re-tagging of existing usage.
>
> I suggest:
>
> * Update the wiki page for key: roundtrip, to reflect the correct meaning,
> and advize to use circular_route=yes or route:circular=yes (2Bdecided).
> Whether or not the redefined key:roundtrip is still useful or should be
> deprecated, can be decided later. It does not matter to me, at this point.
>
> * Add a page for the new key:circular_route=yes|no or
> route:circular=yes|no, to indicate that a route is to be regarded as
> circular/linear (no matter if it's a closed route on the map or not).
>
> If other route variants are foreseen, maybe route:circular=yes|no is
> better?
>
> Details about context and use cases can be added and modified through the
> talk-pages.
>
> Allright?
>
> 2018-05-25 23:46 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On 25/05/18 21:31, Peter Elderson wrote:
>>
>> It's an example. But we are not alone...
>>
>>
>> Same in Sydney Australia - billed on entry and exit points .. not on how
>> long you have been inside the  transport system system.
>> Some 'homeless' use it as a warm dry resting place, doing long round
>> trips.
>>
>>
>> 2018-05-25 12:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>>
>>> 2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :
>>>
 How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
 chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled between
 check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?

>>>
>>>
>>> isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing can
>>> deal with roundtrips or not?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing 
>> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I would like to wrap this up, without a formal proposal process, if there
is no fundamental objection.
Afterwards, I will announce it in the Dutch community and arrange the
re-tagging of existing usage.

I suggest:

* Update the wiki page for key: roundtrip, to reflect the correct meaning,
and advize to use circular_route=yes or route:circular=yes (2Bdecided).
Whether or not the redefined key:roundtrip is still useful or should be
deprecated, can be decided later. It does not matter to me, at this point.

* Add a page for the new key:circular_route=yes|no or
route:circular=yes|no, to indicate that a route is to be regarded as
circular/linear (no matter if it's a closed route on the map or not).

If other route variants are foreseen, maybe route:circular=yes|no is better?

Details about context and use cases can be added and modified through the
talk-pages.

Allright?

2018-05-25 23:46 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> On 25/05/18 21:31, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> It's an example. But we are not alone...
>
>
> Same in Sydney Australia - billed on entry and exit points .. not on how
> long you have been inside the  transport system system.
> Some 'homeless' use it as a warm dry resting place, doing long round
> trips.
>
>
> 2018-05-25 12:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>> 2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :
>>
>>> How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
>>> chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled between
>>> check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?
>>>
>>
>>
>> isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing can deal
>> with roundtrips or not?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing 
> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Warin]

On 25/05/18 21:31, Peter Elderson wrote:

It's an example. But we are not alone...


Same in Sydney Australia - billed on entry and exit points .. not on how 
long you have been inside the  transport system system.

Some 'homeless' use it as a warm dry resting place, doing long round trips.


2018-05-25 12:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer >:


2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson >:

How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one
type of chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on
distance travelled between check-in and check-out, no matter
the route or vehicle?



isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing
can deal with roundtrips or not?

Cheers,
Martin

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





--
Vr gr Peter Elderson


___
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] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 25. May 2018, at 13:43, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> 
> This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
> English to perform a "round trip".


from what I learnt in the dictionary I agree with this, probably badly named. 
circular_route would be a better term.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

As to the term roundtrip, I have inderstood this completely wrong, probably
because the Dutch term Rondwandeling literally translates as roundtrip. Now
that I've been set straight, I think the correct meaning should be
documented on the wiki page. The bracketed "explanation" (circular route)
should be removed.
The correct meaning is something like:
roundtrip=yes means you can return to the starting point by (almost) the
same route and transport method.

Personally I would stay away from payment, embarking/boarding, ticket types
etcetera. If I can cross the road, get another ticket and return tot the
starting point in another bus, I would still consider it roundtrip=yes.

Which in PT would be the default, I think.. So you would only tag
roundtrip=no if you can't return the same way.
I don't know enough about PT tagging to know if that's useful in that
context. If so, a use case would be nice on the wiki page.

With hiking routes, this meaning of the tag is not useful, I would say.
Current use is, sadly, opposite the actual meaning.

>From the Dutch forum I get that they think it's important to tag circular
routes as such, even when they are geographically not circular routes
(circular in the sense that you just keep following the markings and then
you end up in the same place you started.) Tagging geographically circular
hiking roads as non-circular, I can't think of a use case, but that's fine.

I agree that circular=yes|no is confusing, because a special meaning of
circular in the context of a route is meant, not literally circular in
shape. Route:circular=yes is cool with me.

The other important attribute for the Dutch is oneway or not, for hiking
and biking that means that the waymarks are onesided. That happens more
than you would think! oneway=yes in combination with the correct sorting
direction should be enough I think?

In sum, just one additional key needed, and of course correction tagging of
roundtrip=yes to route:circular=yes.

Probably have to adapt some validation and detection tools, too.




2018-05-25 15:53 GMT+02:00 Johnparis :

> I would generally agree with all your points.
>
> A slightly more formal definition (though not fully rigorous) for me would
> be: a circular route is one in which, from any boarding area, you can
> return to the same boarding area without being forced to disembark.
>
> I say boarding area rather than point because of the fairly frequent case
> where the dropoff and pickup points serve the same area (such as a train
> station) but are not necessarily identical.
>
> The example I gave in the other thread, I believe, is marketed that way
> because people are indeed supposed to leave the bus, though I would imagine
> that since most people use weekly or monthly passes, most drivers would
> probably look the other way.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184
>
> Thorsten's description is good, but technically pretty much any bus route
> is a roundtrip (circular) topologically. A typical route is:
>
> A -> B -> C -> (forced disembark) -> C' -> B' -> A' -> (forced disembark)
> -> A ...
>
> Typically B and B' are on opposite sides of a two-way street. That's the
> simplest example. Topologically it's the same as a circular route, because
> the bus makes a U turn at each end and continues. So it's a question of
> marketing and general public understanding, more than mathematical rigor.
> But the variations are bewildering.
>
> Personally, I track circular routes for validation purposes. As I
> understand Public Transport version 2, every route variant requires a route
> master, even if the master has only one variant. So masters with one
> variant are oddballs; most routes have at least two. A master with only one
> variant is typically either (a) a circular route (so I mark them in my
> private database), (b) a PTv1 route (thus needing an upgrade), or (c) an
> error (thus needing further investigation).
>
> I would mark the OSM example above in my data as a circular route, so I
> won't flag it as needing further work, but it would not meet my more formal
> definition of a circular route, because of the forced disembark, so I would
> not consider it as qualifying for a "roundtrip=yes" tag.
>
> If there is sentiment to change the name of the tag, I would suggest
> "route:circular=yes". (There are "only" 25000 in the OSM data, so it might
> be manageable.) I don't like "circular=yes" because it's so vague.
> (example: building=silo circular=yes ?)
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:23 PM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> Oops, I didn't think this topic would generate so much response, even
>> though I charged a bit in the first mail.
>>
>> Let me try to make some sense of it. I have seen enough use cases, I
>> think.
>>
>> a. There are two use cases which use the actual definition on the wiki: a
>> geagraphically closed route, start-point=end-point. One is about marking
>> routes as roundtrips based on JOSM validation, 

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Johnparis]

I would generally agree with all your points.

A slightly more formal definition (though not fully rigorous) for me would
be: a circular route is one in which, from any boarding area, you can
return to the same boarding area without being forced to disembark.

I say boarding area rather than point because of the fairly frequent case
where the dropoff and pickup points serve the same area (such as a train
station) but are not necessarily identical.

The example I gave in the other thread, I believe, is marketed that way
because people are indeed supposed to leave the bus, though I would imagine
that since most people use weekly or monthly passes, most drivers would
probably look the other way.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184

Thorsten's description is good, but technically pretty much any bus route
is a roundtrip (circular) topologically. A typical route is:

A -> B -> C -> (forced disembark) -> C' -> B' -> A' -> (forced disembark)
-> A ...

Typically B and B' are on opposite sides of a two-way street. That's the
simplest example. Topologically it's the same as a circular route, because
the bus makes a U turn at each end and continues. So it's a question of
marketing and general public understanding, more than mathematical rigor.
But the variations are bewildering.

Personally, I track circular routes for validation purposes. As I
understand Public Transport version 2, every route variant requires a route
master, even if the master has only one variant. So masters with one
variant are oddballs; most routes have at least two. A master with only one
variant is typically either (a) a circular route (so I mark them in my
private database), (b) a PTv1 route (thus needing an upgrade), or (c) an
error (thus needing further investigation).

I would mark the OSM example above in my data as a circular route, so I
won't flag it as needing further work, but it would not meet my more formal
definition of a circular route, because of the forced disembark, so I would
not consider it as qualifying for a "roundtrip=yes" tag.

If there is sentiment to change the name of the tag, I would suggest
"route:circular=yes". (There are "only" 25000 in the OSM data, so it might
be manageable.) I don't like "circular=yes" because it's so vague.
(example: building=silo circular=yes ?)




On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:23 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> Oops, I didn't think this topic would generate so much response, even
> though I charged a bit in the first mail.
>
> Let me try to make some sense of it. I have seen enough use cases, I think.
>
> a. There are two use cases which use the actual definition on the wiki: a
> geagraphically closed route, start-point=end-point. One is about marking
> routes as roundtrips based on JOSM validation, then monitoring if the chain
> had broken so you can fix it. The other is marking an unfinished  route as
> roundtrip in order to detect it for completion. To me, this is almost the
> same use case.
>
> b. A range of use cases are opposite: a geographical roundtrip has to be
> regarded as non-roundtrip, or a geographical non-roundtrip has to be
> regarded as a roundtrip anyway.
>
> Could we agree that the wiki should cover b.?
> I think this does not exclude a.
>
> If anyone judges that a geographical roundtrip should explicitly be tagged
> as roundtrip=yes, ok.
>  do think that when one of the use cases under b. applies, then you have
> an exception to what the map says, with a reason. Then this takes
> precedence over the geographical default.
> This could be a geographical roundtrip tagged as roundtrip=no for whatever
> reason, or a geographical non-roundtrip tagged as roundtrip=yes, for
> whatever reason. It would be nice to know the reason, of course. For my
> part, "everybody/nobody here calls this a circular line" is reason enough.
>
> Could we agree on that too?
>
> If so, all that remains is add this to the wiki.
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> Looked it up, of course. Definitions are not that clear-cut. Generally,
> round trip means that you return where you came from, some definitions say
> along the same route, some say mostly along the same route but not
> necessarily. I think the less strict definition covers the usage on osm,
> except for the term "ciircular", best avoid that.
>

I'm not an expert on bus routes.  But I am British, so I can tell you one
Briton's (imperfect) understanding
based on how I've seen these terms used.

A circular route encompasses an area whereas an ordinary route does not.
An ordinary route
may be A->B->C->B->A whereas a circular is A->B->C->D->A, where B and D are
not close to
each other ("close" is vaguely defined).  It's not clear because all buses
in my town are forced,
by the one-way system in the town centre, to loop around the town centre.
Technically all
the routes are circular (because of that one-way system) but I'd regard
only one of them
as such.  The rest are shaped more like ---O where the "O" is
the one-way
system.

A round trip has only one terminus (and that may only be a terminus at the
start and
end of the timetable.  A non-roundtrip route is A->B->C [alight] [embark]
A->B->C
whereas a roundtrip would be A->B->C->B->A or, in the case of a circular,
A->B->C->D->A.  In the case of a circular roundtrip you can get on at B and
off
at D even if C is the furthest point from A.  In either case you can get on
at A and get
off at A without having to alight in between.  If you are required to
alight at C
then it is a return journey, not a round trip.

In the case of tour buses or boat tours, there is not only one terminus but
that
terminus may also be the only point at which it is possible to alight or
disembark.
Such routes also tend to be circulars so that you don't see the same
scenery twice.

Whether or not the tags were intended to make those distinctions or
something else
is another matter.  Having tags that don't match common British usage is not
helpful.  OTOH, I'm not sure what mapping benefit there is in tags with
those
meanings.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Looked it up, of course. Definitions are not that clear-cut. Generally,
round trip means that you return where you came from, some definitions say
along the same route, some say mostly along the same route but not
necessarily. I think the less strict definition covers the usage on osm,
except for the term "ciircular", best avoid that.

Still, to a Brit "round trip" would suggest two-directional, but the usage
of roundtrip on OSM implies one-directional, when talking about public
transport.

I don't think I can change that, I'm afraid, but if you want to have a
go...?

2018-05-25 13:43 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> On 25 May 2018 at 06:48, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
> > What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
> > Explanations just say
> >> roundtrip=yes/no(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route
> goes from
> >> A to B. Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the
> route are
> >> at the same location (circular route).
>
> This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
> English to perform a "round trip".
>
> A vehicle that completes a (approximately) circular route to arrive
> back at its starting point is NOT called a "round trip", whether or
> not it performs that circuit just once, or multiple times.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I've looked up the Circle Line in London. It is not circular in any way!

2018-05-25 14:00 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> I think circular is used to indicate that the vehicle in the end returns
> at the same point. I don't think the actual shape of the route matters. How
> would it be called in British Enhglish if the vehicle returns at the same
> point, only by a different route, in order to serve more boarding points?
>
> 2018-05-25 13:43 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
>
>> On 25 May 2018 at 06:48, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>>
>> > What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>> > Explanations just say
>> >> roundtrip=yes/no(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route
>> goes from
>> >> A to B. Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the
>> route are
>> >> at the same location (circular route).
>>
>> This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
>> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
>> English to perform a "round trip".
>>
>> A vehicle that completes a (approximately) circular route to arrive
>> back at its starting point is NOT called a "round trip", whether or
>> not it performs that circuit just once, or multiple times.
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I think circular is used to indicate that the vehicle in the end returns at
the same point. I don't think the actual shape of the route matters. How
would it be called in British Enhglish if the vehicle returns at the same
point, only by a different route, in order to serve more boarding points?

2018-05-25 13:43 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> On 25 May 2018 at 06:48, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
> > What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
> > Explanations just say
> >> roundtrip=yes/no(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route
> goes from
> >> A to B. Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the
> route are
> >> at the same location (circular route).
>
> This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
> English to perform a "round trip".
>
> A vehicle that completes a (approximately) circular route to arrive
> back at its starting point is NOT called a "round trip", whether or
> not it performs that circuit just once, or multiple times.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[osm.tagging]

If the route as a whole is a roundtrip, then exactly that point.

 

Let’s assume the route has stops:

 

A1

B

C

D

E

A2

 

A1 and A2 may be exactly the same point or close to each other, but that 
doesn’t matter, because for a roundtrip route, I would expect the vehicle to 
visits:

 

A1

B

C

D

E

A2

A1 (if different from A2)

B

C

D

E

A2

…

 

And so on, until end of service (of the vehicle)

 

If I get on at B, and it’s a roundtrip route, I would expect to be able to 
later get off at B again.

 

From: Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com> 
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 20:40
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

Exactly that point or in the vicinity? No matter the payment, ticketing and 
boarding rules?

 

2018-05-25 12:32 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au 
<mailto:osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> >:

Or to express it even more general:

 

If you start at any stop, and remain on the vehicle, you will at some later 
point get back to the stop you started on.

 

From: osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au 
<mailto:osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>  <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au 
<mailto:osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> > 
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 20:23
To: 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools' <tagging@openstreetmap.org 
<mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s 
*before* it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.

 

You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but this is 
not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route after arriving 
at the last stop).

 

From: Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com <mailto:pelder...@gmail.com> > 
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
To: Tagging list OSM <tagging@openstreetmap.org 
<mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

What is the use of the key:roundtrip? 

Explanations just say  


 <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip> roundtrip=yes/no

(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use 
roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the 
same location (circular route).

It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an 
abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes. 

Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as 
roundtrip=no?


 

The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more access 
ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what is the 
purpose? 

 

Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid reason for 
tagging?

 

-- 

Peter Elderson


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





 

-- 

Vr gr Peter Elderson

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Andy Mabbett]

On 25 May 2018 at 06:48, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
> Explanations just say
>> roundtrip=yes/no(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes 
>> from
>> A to B. Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route 
>> are
>> at the same location (circular route).

This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
English to perform a "round trip".

A vehicle that completes a (approximately) circular route to arrive
back at its starting point is NOT called a "round trip", whether or
not it performs that circuit just once, or multiple times.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

It's an example. But we are not alone...

2018-05-25 12:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

> 2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :
>
>> How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
>> chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled between
>> check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?
>>
>
>
> isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing can deal
> with roundtrips or not?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-25 12:59 GMT+02:00 Jo :

> But a line that does A->B, then B->A is not a roundtrip, and it would take
> 2 route relations to describe the itineraries + a route_master to describe
> the line.
>


+1, most buses go A->B and return, a rountrip is A->A

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

I don't see a problem with adding tags that enable validation to be
performed, even if it means some redundancy in the data. But I may have
misinterpreted the roundtrip tag myself.

Jo

2018-05-25 11:52 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> Isn't that should-be tagging for the validator? I don't know if that's
> less frowned-upon than tagging for the renderer...
> Besides, if you derive the tag from your tagging tool, couldn't the
> validator do that directly?
>
> 2018-05-25 11:15 GMT+02:00 Jo :
>
>> I tend to use roundtrip=yes when (after fixing) a route relation gets
>> this double way icon next to the ways, instead of a single vertical line
>> (JOSM only ofc).
>>
>> If we all start using it that way, we could create a validator rule for
>> checking the relation is still 'all right'.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> 2018-05-25 11:10 GMT+02:00 Johnparis :
>>
>>> Interesting.
>>>
>>> Similarly, a route that is not closed can be a roundtrip. The start and
>>> end points might be several meters apart, even on different roads, yet
>>> serve the same destination. There are a few (very few) examples I have
>>> found in the Paris area. Here's one. It's not marked roundtrip=yes but
>>> probably should be:
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184
>>>
>>> I agree that this tag seems to be of very limited usefulness, though I
>>> confess to having used it on occasion.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 On 25/05/18 15:48, Peter Elderson wrote:

 What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
 Explanations just say
 roundtrip =yes/no 
 (optional)
 Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use
 roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the
 same location (circular route). It seems rather pointless to tag an
 obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an abvious roundtrip with
 roundtrip=yes.
 Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
 roundtrip=no?


 A route that is 'closed' can be a non round trip.
 For example the bus only does one circuit then goes on to another route
 elsewhere. This can be done to provide services to both that route and to
 other parts of the community with other routes.
 There may not be enough demand for a continuous circuit to be viable.

 ___
 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

Paul,

Let me know when you would have time for a hangout. I'd like to have a look
at that route! Preferably with somebody who actually knows how the bus
follows it.

But a line that does A->B, then B->A is not a roundtrip, and it would take
2 route relations to describe the itineraries + a route_master to describe
the line.

Jo

2018-05-25 12:51 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> In that case it is a service-thing rather than a route-thing. Is it
>> generally used like that?
>> The wiki just mentions the co-location of start/endpoint of the route.
>>
>> I'm going by what I've encountered in various towns and cities.
>
> I've seen many routes where the bus goes from A->B, passengers disembark
> at B,
> new passengers board at B and the bus then goes from B->A.  It's not a
> round trip.
> Even if you buy a return ticket or have an unlimited use ticket, you still
> have to get
> off at B.  Often there is a 5 or 10 minute (or longer) layover at B while
> the driver
> has a piss or a cup of coffee or a smoke (or all three at once, perhaps).
>
> I've also seen routes where it truly is a round trip (and most of those
> were also
> circulars).  With an unlimited ticket you could stay on the bus all day.
> I met one
> guy who did because in winter it cost him too much to heat his house, so
> there
> he was on the bus with a packed lunch, several cans of beer (illegal) and
> a happy
> grin.
>
> There is also a route I've yet to map, and am struggling to figure out how
> to
> do it.  One of the things I can handle is still pertinent: it goes from
> the bus station
> (A) like this: A->B->C->D->A->B->P->A->Z->A->B [out of service] -> A.  Z
> is
> actually a roundabout, with no official stops between it and A, merely so
> the bus
> can enter A in one direction and come back in the other.  But it's a
> hail-and-ride
> service, so theoretically it's possible to get off or on at Z.  Over the
> entire route
> it's not a round trip even though it visits some parts of the route more
> than once.
> Actually, I simplified a lot.  There are aspects of that route I can't
> figure out how
> to handle.
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

woud the roundtrip tag help you with that?

2018-05-25 12:51 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>> In that case it is a service-thing rather than a route-thing. Is it
>> generally used like that?
>> The wiki just mentions the co-location of start/endpoint of the route.
>>
>> I'm going by what I've encountered in various towns and cities.
>
> I've seen many routes where the bus goes from A->B, passengers disembark
> at B,
> new passengers board at B and the bus then goes from B->A.  It's not a
> round trip.
> Even if you buy a return ticket or have an unlimited use ticket, you still
> have to get
> off at B.  Often there is a 5 or 10 minute (or longer) layover at B while
> the driver
> has a piss or a cup of coffee or a smoke (or all three at once, perhaps).
>
> I've also seen routes where it truly is a round trip (and most of those
> were also
> circulars).  With an unlimited ticket you could stay on the bus all day.
> I met one
> guy who did because in winter it cost him too much to heat his house, so
> there
> he was on the bus with a packed lunch, several cans of beer (illegal) and
> a happy
> grin.
>
> There is also a route I've yet to map, and am struggling to figure out how
> to
> do it.  One of the things I can handle is still pertinent: it goes from
> the bus station
> (A) like this: A->B->C->D->A->B->P->A->Z->A->B [out of service] -> A.  Z
> is
> actually a roundabout, with no official stops between it and A, merely so
> the bus
> can enter A in one direction and come back in the other.  But it's a
> hail-and-ride
> service, so theoretically it's possible to get off or on at Z.  Over the
> entire route
> it's not a round trip even though it visits some parts of the route more
> than once.
> Actually, I simplified a lot.  There are aspects of that route I can't
> figure out how
> to handle.
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Peter Elderson 
wrote:

> In that case it is a service-thing rather than a route-thing. Is it
> generally used like that?
> The wiki just mentions the co-location of start/endpoint of the route.
>
> I'm going by what I've encountered in various towns and cities.

I've seen many routes where the bus goes from A->B, passengers disembark at
B,
new passengers board at B and the bus then goes from B->A.  It's not a
round trip.
Even if you buy a return ticket or have an unlimited use ticket, you still
have to get
off at B.  Often there is a 5 or 10 minute (or longer) layover at B while
the driver
has a piss or a cup of coffee or a smoke (or all three at once, perhaps).

I've also seen routes where it truly is a round trip (and most of those
were also
circulars).  With an unlimited ticket you could stay on the bus all day.  I
met one
guy who did because in winter it cost him too much to heat his house, so
there
he was on the bus with a packed lunch, several cans of beer (illegal) and a
happy
grin.

There is also a route I've yet to map, and am struggling to figure out how
to
do it.  One of the things I can handle is still pertinent: it goes from the
bus station
(A) like this: A->B->C->D->A->B->P->A->Z->A->B [out of service] -> A.  Z is
actually a roundabout, with no official stops between it and A, merely so
the bus
can enter A in one direction and come back in the other.  But it's a
hail-and-ride
service, so theoretically it's possible to get off or on at Z.  Over the
entire route
it's not a round trip even though it visits some parts of the route more
than once.
Actually, I simplified a lot.  There are aspects of that route I can't
figure out how
to handle.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

I wish you a happy trip on that bus, hope it has toilets and a tolerable
coffee machine

2018-05-25 12:37 GMT+02:00 Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>:

> Ticket pricing shouldn't have anything to do with it. Here in Belgium, you
> buy a ticket valid for a specific duration. As long as it didn't expire,
> you can still board the vehicle.
>
> OK, I'm not sure what would happen if you got onto a 'roundtrip' bus with
> a ticket valid for 1 hour and you are still on it 3 hours later... Oh those
> corner cases!
>
> Jo
>
> 2018-05-25 12:32 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:
>
>> Or to express it even more general:
>>
>>
>>
>> If you start at any stop, and remain on the vehicle, you will at some
>> later point get back to the stop you started on.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au <osm.tagging@thorsten.engler.i
>> d.au>
>> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 20:23
>> *To:* 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools' <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>>
>>
>>
>> I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s *
>> *before** it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.
>>
>>
>>
>> You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but
>> this is not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route
>> after arriving at the last stop).
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
>> *To:* Tagging list OSM <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> *Subject:* [Tagging] roundtrip
>>
>>
>>
>> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>>
>> Explanations just say
>>
>> roundtrip <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip>=yes/no
>>
>> (optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B.
>> Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at
>> the same location (circular route).
>>
>> It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no,
>> or an abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes.
>>
>> Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
>> roundtrip=no?
>>
>>
>>
>> The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more
>> access ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what
>> is the purpose?
>>
>>
>>
>> Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid
>> reason for tagging?
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Peter Elderson
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Exactly that point or in the vicinity? No matter the payment, ticketing and
boarding rules?

2018-05-25 12:32 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:

> Or to express it even more general:
>
>
>
> If you start at any stop, and remain on the vehicle, you will at some
> later point get back to the stop you started on.
>
>
>
> *From:* osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au <osm.tagging@thorsten.engler.
> id.au>
> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 20:23
> *To:* 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools' <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s *
> *before** it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.
>
>
>
> You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but
> this is not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route
> after arriving at the last stop).
>
>
>
> *From:* Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
> *To:* Tagging list OSM <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>
> Explanations just say
>
> roundtrip <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip>=yes/no
>
> (optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use
> roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the
> same location (circular route).
>
> It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no,
> or an abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes.
>
> Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
> roundtrip=no?
>
>
>
> The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more
> access ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what
> is the purpose?
>
>
>
> Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid reason
> for tagging?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Peter Elderson
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Jo]

Ticket pricing shouldn't have anything to do with it. Here in Belgium, you
buy a ticket valid for a specific duration. As long as it didn't expire,
you can still board the vehicle.

OK, I'm not sure what would happen if you got onto a 'roundtrip' bus with a
ticket valid for 1 hour and you are still on it 3 hours later... Oh those
corner cases!

Jo

2018-05-25 12:32 GMT+02:00 <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au>:

> Or to express it even more general:
>
>
>
> If you start at any stop, and remain on the vehicle, you will at some
> later point get back to the stop you started on.
>
>
>
> *From:* osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au <osm.tagging@thorsten.engler.
> id.au>
> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 20:23
> *To:* 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools' <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s *
> *before** it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.
>
>
>
> You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but
> this is not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route
> after arriving at the last stop).
>
>
>
> *From:* Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
> *To:* Tagging list OSM <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>
> Explanations just say
>
> roundtrip <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip>=yes/no
>
> (optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use
> roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the
> same location (circular route).
>
> It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no,
> or an abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes.
>
> Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
> roundtrip=no?
>
>
>
> The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more
> access ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what
> is the purpose?
>
>
>
> Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid reason
> for tagging?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Peter Elderson
>
> ___
> 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] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-25 12:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson :

> How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
> chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled between
> check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?
>


isn't this offtopic? Why would we care if the Dutch PT tariffing can deal
with roundtrips or not?

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[osm.tagging]

Or to express it even more general:

 

If you start at any stop, and remain on the vehicle, you will at some later 
point get back to the stop you started on.

 

From: osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> 
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 20:23
To: 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools' <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s 
*before* it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.

 

You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but this is 
not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route after arriving 
at the last stop).

 

From: Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com <mailto:pelder...@gmail.com> > 
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
To: Tagging list OSM <tagging@openstreetmap.org 
<mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

What is the use of the key:roundtrip? 

Explanations just say  


 <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip> roundtrip=yes/no

(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use 
roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the 
same location (circular route).

It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an 
abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes. 

Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as 
roundtrip=no?


 

The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more access 
ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what is the 
purpose? 

 

Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid reason for 
tagging?

 

-- 

Peter Elderson

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

So it would depend on the payment requirements and ticket usage... then, if
a return ticket is available it would count as a roundtrip, even though you
pay extra for the return trip?

How would that be applicable in Nederland, where PT uses one type of
chipcard for all voyages and payment is based on distance travelled between
check-in and check-out, no matter the route or vehicle?

2018-05-25 12:10 GMT+02:00 Ralph Aytoun <ralph.ayt...@ntlworld.com>:

> Thoughts on the subject
>
>
>
> For a route to be a round trip on public transport it would be required
> that only one ticket purchase would be necessary to take you full circle,
> and this would include a tourist bus that allows you to get off and back on
> again along the route until you get back to the original start point.
>
>
>
> A river cruise would fall into this same category even though it will go
> up one side of the river and back down the other to the original start
> jetty and requires a single round trip ticket. If there is a disembark
> point along the route and a new ticket is required to return then this is
> not a round trip and could use the roundtrip=no tag as a warning for users
> planning their trip
>
>
>
> This means that a bus that has a route that takes it to a destination and
> then you need to buy a return ticket to get back along the same or similar
> route to the original start point cannot be a roundtrip.
>
>
>
> Falling into this train of thought would it apply to a tourist train that
> takes you along a dedicated route to a destination, allows you to get off
> and look around then get on the same train and head back to the original
> destination, all included in the single ticket purchase. Being careful here
> because they may have a separate cheaper ticket if you are only going to
> the destination, in which case would the tourist trip be  a return ticket
> (or a roundtrip ticket?)
>
>
>
> So a roundtrip would not necessarily indicate a circular route but could
> also be used to indicate that there is a single roundtrip ticket such as a
> park-and-ride bus or river cruise that returns you to your original
> destination in one journey.
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, May 25, 2018 10:38 AM
> *To: *Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Tagging] roundtrip
>
>
>
> Thanks for the example.
>
> Looks to me the bus will have to drive through the tunnel for its next
> round. This route just needs to be completed! Now it's a oneway route. The
> route_master only contains one relation in one direction.
>
>
>
> 2018-05-25 11:10 GMT+02:00 Johnparis <ok...@johnfreed.com>:
>
> Interesting.
>
>
>
> Similarly, a route that is not closed can be a roundtrip. The start and
> end points might be several meters apart, even on different roads, yet
> serve the same destination. There are a few (very few) examples I have
> found in the Paris area. Here's one. It's not marked roundtrip=yes but
> probably should be:
>
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184
>
>
>
> I agree that this tag seems to be of very limited usefulness, though I
> confess to having used it on occasion.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/05/18 15:48, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>
> Explanations just say
>
> roundtrip <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roundtrip>=yes/no
>
> (optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use
> roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the
> same location (circular route).
>
> It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no,
> or an abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes.
>
> Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
> roundtrip=no?
>
>
> A route that is 'closed' can be a non round trip.
> For example the bus only does one circuit then goes on to another route
> elsewhere. This can be done to provide services to both that route and to
> other parts of the community with other routes.
> There may not be enough demand for a continuous circuit to be viable.
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[osm.tagging]

I interpret roundtrip as “you can get from a stop to another stop that’s 
*before* it in the list of stops by simply remaining in the vehicle”.

 

You can have routes where the start and stop are the same location, but this is 
not true (as the vehicle always goes on to serve another route after arriving 
at the last stop).

 

From: Peter Elderson  
Sent: Friday, 25 May 2018 15:48
To: Tagging list OSM 
Subject: [Tagging] roundtrip

 

What is the use of the key:roundtrip? 

Explanations just say  


  roundtrip=yes/no

(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use 
roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the 
same location (circular route).

It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an 
abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes. 

Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as 
roundtrip=no?


 

The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more access 
ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what is the 
purpose? 

 

Allowing apps to select only "official" roundtrips? Is that a valid reason for 
tagging?

 

-- 

Peter Elderson

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

In that case it is a service-thing rather than a route-thing. Is it
generally used like that?
The wiki just mentions the co-location of start/endpoint of the route.

The suggested use as a validator-tag requires the use exactlly as the wiki
says, while other suggested uses mark cases where the tag differs from the
location-based definition.

I see a consistency problem here... which explains why the actual use of
this tag is also inconsistent.


2018-05-25 11:58 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :

> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 6:48 AM, Peter Elderson 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more
>> access ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what
>> is the purpose?
>>
>
> I would say that roundtrip=yes on route A->B->A means that you can remain
> on the bus at B and roundtrip=no means
> that you are (officially) required to disembark.  I mention "officially"
> because some drivers may permit some passengers
> to remain on the bus.  If you are required to disembark at B, even if you
> do not have to buy another ticket when you
> get back on board, it's roundtrip=no.  It's not a matter of duration of
> the stop at B, it's whether or not you can start at
> A and return to A without leaving the bus.
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-25 11:10 GMT+02:00 Johnparis :

>
> Similarly, a route that is not closed can be a roundtrip. The start and
> end points might be several meters apart, even on different roads, yet
> serve the same destination.
>


+1
in OSM you can also expect incomplete data, someone starts mapping
something and then leaves it for someone else to complete it. Someone might
map just a part of a roundtrip route. She could already tag on the relation
that the route is a roundtrip without this being already recognizable from
the route geometry on the map.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Ralph Aytoun]

Thoughts on the subject

For a route to be a round trip on public transport it would be required that 
only one ticket purchase would be necessary to take you full circle, and this 
would include a tourist bus that allows you to get off and back on again along 
the route until you get back to the original start point. 

A river cruise would fall into this same category even though it will go up one 
side of the river and back down the other to the original start jetty and 
requires a single round trip ticket. If there is a disembark point along the 
route and a new ticket is required to return then this is not a round trip and 
could use the roundtrip=no tag as a warning for users planning their trip

This means that a bus that has a route that takes it to a destination and then 
you need to buy a return ticket to get back along the same or similar route to 
the original start point cannot be a roundtrip.

Falling into this train of thought would it apply to a tourist train that takes 
you along a dedicated route to a destination, allows you to get off and look 
around then get on the same train and head back to the original destination, 
all included in the single ticket purchase. Being careful here because they may 
have a separate cheaper ticket if you are only going to the destination, in 
which case would the tourist trip be  a return ticket (or a roundtrip ticket?)

So a roundtrip would not necessarily indicate a circular route but could also 
be used to indicate that there is a single roundtrip ticket such as a 
park-and-ride bus or river cruise that returns you to your original destination 
in one journey.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Peter Elderson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2018 10:38 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

Thanks for the example.
Looks to me the bus will have to drive through the tunnel for its next round. 
This route just needs to be completed! Now it's a oneway route. The 
route_master only contains one relation in one direction.  

2018-05-25 11:10 GMT+02:00 Johnparis <ok...@johnfreed.com>:
Interesting. 

Similarly, a route that is not closed can be a roundtrip. The start and end 
points might be several meters apart, even on different roads, yet serve the 
same destination. There are a few (very few) examples I have found in the Paris 
area. Here's one. It's not marked roundtrip=yes but probably should be:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184

I agree that this tag seems to be of very limited usefulness, though I confess 
to having used it on occasion.


On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 25/05/18 15:48, Peter Elderson wrote:
What is the use of the key:roundtrip?  
Explanations just say  
roundtrip=yes/no
(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use 
roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the 
same location (circular route).
It seems rather pointless to tag an obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an 
abvious roundtrip with roundtrip=yes. 
Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as 
roundtrip=no?


A route that is 'closed' can be a non round trip. 
For example the bus only does one circuit then goes on to another route 
elsewhere. This can be done to provide services to both that route and to other 
parts of the community with other routes. 
There may not be enough demand for a continuous circuit to be viable. 

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


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




-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 6:48 AM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

>
> The only use case I can imagine is when a roundtrip has one ore more
> access ways which are included in the route relation. But even then, what
> is the purpose?
>

I would say that roundtrip=yes on route A->B->A means that you can remain
on the bus at B and roundtrip=no means
that you are (officially) required to disembark.  I mention "officially"
because some drivers may permit some passengers
to remain on the bus.  If you are required to disembark at B, even if you
do not have to buy another ticket when you
get back on board, it's roundtrip=no.  It's not a matter of duration of the
stop at B, it's whether or not you can start at
A and return to A without leaving the bus.

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Peter Elderson]

Isn't that should-be tagging for the validator? I don't know if that's less
frowned-upon than tagging for the renderer...
Besides, if you derive the tag from your tagging tool, couldn't the
validator do that directly?

2018-05-25 11:15 GMT+02:00 Jo :

> I tend to use roundtrip=yes when (after fixing) a route relation gets this
> double way icon next to the ways, instead of a single vertical line (JOSM
> only ofc).
>
> If we all start using it that way, we could create a validator rule for
> checking the relation is still 'all right'.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2018-05-25 11:10 GMT+02:00 Johnparis :
>
>> Interesting.
>>
>> Similarly, a route that is not closed can be a roundtrip. The start and
>> end points might be several meters apart, even on different roads, yet
>> serve the same destination. There are a few (very few) examples I have
>> found in the Paris area. Here's one. It's not marked roundtrip=yes but
>> probably should be:
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8140184
>>
>> I agree that this tag seems to be of very limited usefulness, though I
>> confess to having used it on occasion.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 25/05/18 15:48, Peter Elderson wrote:
>>>
>>> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
>>> Explanations just say
>>> roundtrip =yes/no 
>>> (optional)
>>> Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes from A to B. Use
>>> roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route are at the
>>> same location (circular route). It seems rather pointless to tag an
>>> obvious a-b route with roundtrip=no, or an abvious roundtrip with
>>> roundtrip=yes.
>>> Why would you tag an a-b route as roundtrip=yes, or a closed route as
>>> roundtrip=no?
>>>
>>>
>>> A route that is 'closed' can be a non round trip.
>>> For example the bus only does one circuit then goes on to another route
>>> elsewhere. This can be done to provide services to both that route and to
>>> other parts of the community with other routes.
>>> There may not be enough demand for a continuous circuit to be viable.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging