[Talk-ca] Building Canada 2020 (BC2020i) Microsoft has released 120, 000, 000 building outlines for the US
I'm not sure what the implications are but hopefully they'll do Canada soon. OSM-weekly. Cheerio John ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name
On Jul 12, 2018, at 1:46 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > Damien's question appears to be about nodes like > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/438843513, which has > name=Berri-UQAM, operator=Société de transport de Montréal. > short_name=STM seems inappropriate here, we could do > operator:short_name=STM or something but it seems a bit much. Thank you for your analysis and reporting to the list, Jarek! Yes, I agree that operator:short_name=STM is a bit of "overkill" (getting over-specific on the key side). > The nearby station https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26233453 has > name=Jean-Drapeau, network=STM, operator=Société de transport de > Montréal which seems like an attempt as good as we might get. Commuter > rail station https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/548900549 has > network=RTM, operator=Réseau de transport métropolitain which fits > that scheme as well. Similar with a random bus line on North Shore > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3472432 I find that operator=* is a key which certainly applies to "underlying rail infrastructure" objects (railway=rail), especially when the rail is freight-oriented, though I have also seen operator=* set to the value of the passenger operator when the underlying infrastructure is one of [railway=light_rail, railway=subway, railway=tram] on more passenger-oriented rail. Though, I seem to recall more frequently (I'd have to do some Overpass Turbo queries to confirm this) network=* is applied to the passenger (not freight) elements instead of operator=*, both are used, both seem correct. Without getting "lost in the weeds," there are/were three "levels" of railway route relations: #1 is/used to be route=tracks (largely if not completely deprecated in North America, but maybe still used in Germany), #2 is route=railway (a grouping of what we in N.A. call "Subdivisions" or "Branches" or "Industrial Lines") and #3 is route=train relations for passenger rail. We can (and do) have passenger rail as route=train relations all over N.A. withOUT the "underlying infrastructure" of route=railway relations, but I, others and indeed OSM consider this incomplete and rather sloppy. The Germans use all three (or did). The Bottom Line for what we in N.A. should do is to use BOTH of the "middle-" (#2, route=railway) and #3 "higher-" level (route=train) relations to describe "track infrastructure" and "passenger rail routes." OK, thanks for reading all that, it makes a better OSM. > Looking through map very casually I didn't see any operator=STM on the > subway. I did see it on a bus line > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/270258 but changing it to > network=STM and operator=Société de transport de Montréal seems like > it'd be fine there IMO. Yes, again, I agree. > To me "operator" looks a bit more little technical than the other > tags, so to me it would be alright to use the longer more formal name. > But I wouldn't edit-war anyone about it. I'd say run a query, see > which is more common currently, ask people here (as you've done), then > after a week change the minority tags to match. You saying "more technical" might be agreeing with me that operator=* is at a "lower/middle level" (infrastructure on track, not "higher level" as applied to the different relation of route=train for passenger rail). So I think we are largely in agreement: if you (and Canada) want to move into the direction of putting operator=* on freight rail (and maybe sometimes passenger rail), yes, that seems correct. If you additionally want to use the network=* key for, in this example, STM, yes, that makes perfect sense to me as well. So does your suggestion/approach of "run a (OT) query...change minority tags to match." Thank you for good discussion, SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name
Hi all, Damien's question appears to be about nodes like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/438843513, which has name=Berri-UQAM, operator=Société de transport de Montréal. short_name=STM seems inappropriate here, we could do operator:short_name=STM or something but it seems a bit much. The nearby station https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26233453 has name=Jean-Drapeau, network=STM, operator=Société de transport de Montréal which seems like an attempt as good as we might get. Commuter rail station https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/548900549 has network=RTM, operator=Réseau de transport métropolitain which fits that scheme as well. Similar with a random bus line on North Shore https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3472432 Looking through map very casually I didn't see any operator=STM on the subway. I did see it on a bus line https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/270258 but changing it to network=STM and operator=Société de transport de Montréal seems like it'd be fine there IMO. To me "operator" looks a bit more little technical than the other tags, so to me it would be alright to use the longer more formal name. But I wouldn't edit-war anyone about it. I'd say run a query, see which is more common currently, ask people here (as you've done), then after a week change the minority tags to match. --Jarek On 11 July 2018 at 04:45, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: > Hello Damien: > > I'm "meh, OK" with an operator=STM value, but I freely say I haven't checked > in completely with whomever you mean by "the minority." (I "haven't heard > of" any controversy one way or the other, STM or full-name. But that isn't > saying much on my part). I watch what's up with North American rail and it > seems that key-value pair is somewhere around the beginning of correct, at > least from my perspective, fwiw. Being right on it (there) you are way more > on it than I am. I'm sorta like a linguist here. > > However, OSM does have a short_name key and I'd be even better with > short_name=STM or alt_name=STM and operator=Société de transport de Montréal > if you want to get dotting-of-i and crossing-of-t about it. > > I mean, there are wiki pages on loc_name, nat_name, official_name, > short_name, alt_name and more, it's a slightly rich and deep topic in OSM and > in our wiki. I say STM is somewhere around alt_name or short_name. That is > one person's opinion. What happens, happens. I'm a guy typing words right > now, so, yeah. > > I also I notice when people get my name exactly right, as I appreciate that. > And look at that, both of us got "Société de transport de Montréal" exactly > right too (twice), making it a good candidate value for the name=* key. > > SteveA > California > >> On Jul 10, 2018, at 7:22 PM, Damien Riegel wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> I'm new to this list so please forgive me if this topic has already been >> discussed. >> >> In Montréal, the public transportation provider is the "Societé de transport >> de Montréal", more commonly known as STM. Some (the minority) nodes use the >> full name, all the others use the acronym. it would be great to get rid of >> that discrepancy. >> >> If I had to give my opinion on the matter, I'd say "STM" is more appropriate >> as almost everything is branded under the "STM" name (for instance the >> website is https://stm.info, their Facebook page is called "STM - Mouvement >> collectif"), so that's the name people use. I think that also explains why >> "STM" is way more common as operator value than the full name. >> >> >> Regards, >> Damien >> ___ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > ___ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
