Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

stop_position is even worse for trains, which might be hundreds of meters long with dozens of doors. The wiki says to map it as the "center" of the train, but I'm not sure that's useful other than to explicitly indicate which track the train uses, which could probably be deduced from the route

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

The node doesn't describe the platform. The naming is unfortunate, but I think we're stuck with it. The node represents the stop. What stop platform way and stop_position node belongs together can be expressed using a stop_area relation. Then it's needed only once. There is no need to do it over

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Here in Belgium, we have normal buses and longer ones, either can have 2 doors or 3 doors. There is no way of knowing which of those buses is going to serve which stops at a given time. The only thing we do know for sure, is that we are supposed to get on in front, except for wheelchairs and

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

I knew this was going to be hard. Anyway, I made sure that it's definitely allowed to tag bus stops as platform nodes. Every few months I look at the wiki and each time it changes. At present it says that if a stop_position node is present for a bus stop, it has to be added to the route relations.

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Stephen wrote: > If a consumer doesn't care about stop_position members, it's trivial > to > ignore them. If the current spec says they're mandatory, then > propose > making them optional; I would support that. I don't support > prohibiting > or removing them. They are optional in the current

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On 2018-04-16 08:11, Philip Barnes wrote: On 16 April 2018 07:46:13 BST, Jo wrote: Anyway, you're right in that the main point of my proposal is to get people to add 1 object per stop to the route relations. I think this is a good idea for bus routes as they are quite

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On 16 April 2018 07:46:13 BST, Jo wrote: > >What I hear quite often in railway stations is: don't use the last >three >'cars' if you want to get off in minor station such and so. I almost >never >hear them say, get on the train in zone A-E, but I think it is written >on

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Hi Polyglot, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport_map_all_stops_as_nodes I do agree that it would be easier for everyone to have one and only one member on the line relation per actual stop. However, trains and sometimes also trams can have a significant

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

A few years ago it was meant as a way to comply with the PT v2 scheme. For me a nice side effect is/was that JOSM assigns a platform role automatically when adding them to route and stop_area relations. But it wouldn't be hard to reprogram it to do that for simply

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On 11 April 2018 at 19:38, Roland Hieber wrote: > However, a main reason why the Public Transport schema was adopted [1] > was exactly this differentiation between stop position on the route and > platform position/waiting area for the passengers. This was done to > increase

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

Mapping stop_position nodes is just fine. I would simply not add them to the route relations. Mapping platforms as ways or areas adds enhances detail. But no need to add them to the route relations. The proposal is about having 1 object to represent the stops for its whole lifetime and nodes

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:19:32PM +0200, Jo wrote: > Here goes my proposal for a reform in mapping public transport: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport_map_all_stops_as_nodes [...] As I understand it, in Public Transport schema speech, this proposal comes

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

2018-04-10 16:23 GMT+02:00 Stephen Sprunk : > But for the thousands of platform ways/areas that do already exist, you're > proposing that someone has to go back and add nodes, move all the tags > over, change which is the relation member, etc.? That's not very friendly. > You

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

The proposal doesn't say that it's not possible to map the actual platforms as ways or areas in ADDITION to that node, if they are actually present. What it says is that it's not necessary to transfer all the details from the node to the way/area and replace the node in the route relations. The

Re: [Talk-transit] Proposal for simplification of mapping public transport

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Jo wrote: > Here goes my proposal for a reform in mapping public transport: [nodes not platforms] If this applies to Heavy Rail and Light Rail rapid transit and not just Bus Stops, I object. The Transport layer on OpenStreetMap is much more