[Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman I'm making library calls to the routing code and it seems that the router does not understand cul-de-sacs mapped as a single self-intersecting way. This got me thinking about different ways to possibly map cul-de-sacs. I generally use Way with highway=residential or highway=unclassified. At the end of the road there is a loop that intersects the same Way. Here is one that I recently mapped: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? One other possibility that I could think of was splitting the circular part at the end and tagging it junction=roundabout. However, this would imply that the road is one-way, and I'm not sure that that is the case. Typically there is no one way sign on the ground and people feel free to travel in either direction on these (though being a cul-de-sac they don't have a lot of traffic). --Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 09:46:00 AM Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman I'm making library calls to the routing code and it seems that the router does not understand cul-de-sacs mapped as a single self-intersecting way. This got me thinking about different ways to possibly map cul-de-sacs. I generally use Way with highway=residential or highway=unclassified. At the end of the road there is a loop that intersects the same Way. Here is one that I recently mapped: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? One other possibility that I could think of was splitting the circular part at the end and tagging it junction=roundabout. However, this would imply that the road is one-way, and I'm not sure that that is the case. Typically there is no one way sign on the ground and people feel free to travel in either direction on these (though being a cul-de-sac they don't have a lot of traffic). --Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us If it really is just a cul-de-sac, I (and many others) tag them as highway=turning_circle. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman I'm making library calls to the routing code and it seems that the router does not understand cul-de-sacs mapped as a single self-intersecting way. This got me thinking about different ways to possibly map cul-de-sacs. I generally use Way with highway=residential or highway=unclassified. At the end of the road there is a loop that intersects the same Way. Here is one that I recently mapped: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a lot of work. One other possibility that I could think of was splitting the circular part at the end and tagging it junction=roundabout. However, this would imply that the road is one-way, and I'm not sure that that is the case. Typically there is no one way sign on the ground and people feel free to travel in either direction on these (though being a cul-de-sac they don't have a lot of traffic). A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. -- Martijn van Exel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. A mini roundabout is more like a big dot in the middle of the junction, so that all rules of a roundabout are implied on that junction. Example: http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/roundabouts/img/mini.jpg Whereas a normal roundabout is a more or less circular piece of road. Example: http://adamcopeland.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/roundabout-live-local.jpg generally speaking For a cul-de-sac I normally use the highway=turning_circle tag on the last node. Henk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. I agree, this is not a roundabout. I use turning_circle, unless there is an island in the middle, in which case I draw the circular way as used in this example. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Henk Hoff toffeh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.comwrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. A mini roundabout is more like a big dot in the middle of the junction, so that all rules of a roundabout are implied on that junction. Example: http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/roundabouts/img/mini.jpg Whereas a normal roundabout is a more or less circular piece of road. Example: http://adamcopeland.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/roundabout-live-local.jpg generally speaking For a cul-de-sac I normally use the highway=turning_circle tag on the last node. There are two kinds of cul-de-sacs. This is the sort where I tag the last node of the way with highway=turning_circle: http://binged.it/IwzjHv This is the sort that I loop the road way back on itself: http://binged.it/Imk84z ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a lot of work. So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle. I actually also use this approach on roads such as this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683 I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic island. This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate Ways). According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's simply a wider bit of road. Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and replace with a node? Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 8:32 AM, Ian Dees wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Henk Hoff toffeh...@gmail.com mailto:toffeh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com mailto:mve...@gmail.com wrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. A mini roundabout is more like a big dot in the middle of the junction, so that all rules of a roundabout are implied on that junction. Example: http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/roundabouts/img/mini.jpg Whereas a normal roundabout is a more or less circular piece of road. Example: http://adamcopeland.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/roundabout-live-local.jpg generally speaking For a cul-de-sac I normally use the highway=turning_circle tag on the last node. There are two kinds of cul-de-sacs. This is the sort where I tag the last node of the way with highway=turning_circle: http://binged.it/IwzjHv This is the sort that I loop the road way back on itself: http://binged.it/Imk84z Good point, the distinction being the island in the middle. I would argue that even these may be tagged as a turning_circle though, as a roundabout implies, to me, that there is a through traffic function with more than one road connecting to it. -- Martijn van Exel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 8:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exelmve...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a lot of work. So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle. I actually also use this approach on roads such as this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683 I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic island. This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate Ways). According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's simply a wider bit of road. Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and replace with a node? Peter Yes, I disagree with the strict definition (it is probably UK-biased). To me, a turning_circle is any dead end that has some form of design element that facilitates easy turning, whether there's an island or not. -- Martijn van Exel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Peter Dobratz pe...@dobratz.us wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a lot of work. So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle. I actually also use this approach on roads such as this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683 I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic island. This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate Ways). According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's simply a wider bit of road. Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and replace with a node? No, I think we're suggesting 3 things: 1) mini_roundabouts (and regular roundabouts) have multiple exits and are at the junction of many roads. Cul-de-sacs are not mini-roundabouts. 2) When it's a wider bit of road meant to allow vehicles to turn around, then the last node of the road should be placed in the middle of the area and be tagged highway=turning_circle. 3) When the cul-de-sac has an island not meant for traffic a loop of way should go around the island and connect back on itself. Sometimes I become lazy and will put a turning_circle node in the middle of the island and break this rule. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 10:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's simply a wider bit of road. There was a recent discussion on tagging@ in which the 'old guard' refused to accept that it may be common in some places to use turning_circle for a cul-de-sac with an island. Hence the wiki doesn't reflect reality. Another case is with a mini_roundabout - supposedly the center must be flat. But many small circles that fit inside intersections are tagged as mini_roundabouts even if they have a raised island. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 11:31 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Another case is with a mini_roundabout - supposedly the center must be flat. But many small circles that fit inside intersections are tagged as mini_roundabouts even if they have a raised island. The wiki actually says 'there might be also a low, fully traversable dome'. Something like the examples in Mini-Roundabout Examples: Germany (Slide 10) on http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/roundaboutsummit/rndabtatt5.htm There was, curiously enough, a roundabout summit at some point. -- Martijn van Exel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 1:53 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On 4/10/2012 11:31 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Another case is with a mini_roundabout - supposedly the center must be flat. But many small circles that fit inside intersections are tagged as mini_roundabouts even if they have a raised island. The wiki actually says 'there might be also a low, fully traversable dome'. Something like the examples in Mini-Roundabout Examples: Germany (Slide 10) on http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/roundaboutsummit/rndabtatt5.htm And until recently it said that it *usually* does not have a physical island in the middle: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundaboutdiff=747981oldid=689543 I definitely consider this to be a mini_roundabout and continue to tag it as such: http://www.cityoforlando.net/transportation/TransportationEngineeringDiv/images/100_5738.JPG ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Peter Dobratz pe...@dobratz.us wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman I'm making library calls to the routing code and it seems that the router does not understand cul-de-sacs mapped as a single self-intersecting way. I can understand why, it's a little nonstandard. If it's a cul-de-sac with just a turning circle at the end with no median, I would simply put the end node in the center of the turning circle and tag it highway=turning_circle. You can see a subdivision with several of these features at http://osm.org/go/T4_w_KHs If there's an island in the middle, create a circle around the island, set one-way in the direction of rotation (almost always anticlockwise in North America), intersect with outlet way, copy outlet's tags to the ring (think one-exit roundabout minus the junction=roundabout). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. Additionally, a mini-roundabout doesn't have a hard median, you could sail straight through the island without hitting anything. As far as I'm aware, we don't have these in the US at all. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 2:23 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: If there's an island in the middle, create a circle around the island, set one-way in the direction of rotation (almost always anticlockwise in North America), intersect with outlet way, copy outlet's tags to the ring (think one-exit roundabout minus the junction=roundabout). That's only correct if there are signs saying it's one-way. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: The wiki actually says 'there might be also a low, fully traversable dome'. My test is is it readily possible to drive over it? If yes, then mini. Otherwise, I treat it as any other median island. A theoretical North Ameircan mini roundabout would be a roundabout with no center island other than a truck apron (that raised concrete area you see on some large roundabouts to allow tractor trailers to run it over safely as they turn, usually lower than the sidewalk, higher than the road, and only for use by trailers off-tracking). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: That's only correct if there are signs saying it's one-way. That's pretty shaky considering that a dividing island (and an island in what would otherwise be a flat turning circle is still such an island) is passed on the right unless posted otherwise in the US and Canada. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
Hello all, I recently mapped a subdivision where the cul-de-sacs really were miniroundabouts rather than turning circles. Kinda cool and unique. So there are, very occasionally, times when miniroundabout is appropriate for the end of a cul-de-sac. Charlotte At 07:39 AM 4/10/2012, you wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363 Is this how people generally map these things? No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a lot of work. So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle. I actually also use this approach on roads such as this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683 I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic island. This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate Ways). According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: There is no central island/reservation to a turning circleit's simply a wider bit of road. Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and replace with a node? Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us Charlotte Wolter 927 18th Street Suite A Santa Monica, California 90403 +1-310-597-4040 techl...@techlady.com Skype: thetechlady The Four Internet Freedoms Freedom to visit any site on the Internet Freedom to access any content or service that is not illegal Freedom to attach any device that does not interfere with the network Freedom to know all the terms of a service, particularly any that would affect the first three freedoms. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Updating of non-Mapnik map options
I've noticed that the only one of the four maps on the OSM main page that has been updating since April Fools has been the 'standard' Mapnik. ITO has also not updated their renderings due to an apparent lack of planet files. Does anyone have information about what's going on here? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] importing bus stops
Hi, Anyone here with experience importing bus stops? Any particular considerations? To make it more concrete, I have permission to import all UTA stops. They come in a shapefile similar to the one available for download here: http://gis.utah.gov/sgid-vector-download/utah-sgid-vector-gis-data-layer-download-index?fc=BusStops_UTA (That particular set of files is out of date, though) There's a number of properties that would map to OSM nodes pretty nicely: MAILBOX - create a separate node amenity= LIGHT - lit=yes SHELTER - shelter=yes BENCH - bench=yes (?) I was planning to just use what I know which is highway=bus_stop for the bus stops, and railway=tram_stop for the light rail stops. But now I see that using highway=bus_stop is *very controversial*[1]! If it weren't so blatantly untrue I'd think it was a joke. Or did I miss something? To get back on topic, if anyone wants to help out devise a mapping from UTA stops file to OSM, I'd welcome some help. I've never done a local import before, and I'm not a particularly big fan of imports, so I want to proceed with caution. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop -- Martijn van Exel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TMC codes
I'll have to look later when I can run Google translate on the page. Cheers, Adam On Apr 10, 2012 4:37 AM, Martijn van Exel mve...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I notice a new tagging scheme for TMC codes has been proposed (in German only for now..) https://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/DE:Proposed_features/** New_TMC_schemehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Proposed_features/New_TMC_scheme There is a modest discussion going on in tagging@. I'm curious: * Has this topic come up in the US before? * Is TMC LCD data freely available in N-America? With the current focus on remapping (yes we can!) this may not be high on your prio lists, but it's being discussed now and seems to have some traction in Germany, so if there's anything we want to weigh in from a N-American perspective, we should do it now. -- Martijn van Exel __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] importing bus stops
On 4/10/2012 7:39 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I was planning to just use what I know which is highway=bus_stop for the bus stops, and railway=tram_stop for the light rail stops. But now I see that using highway=bus_stop is *very controversial*[1]! If it weren't so blatantly untrue I'd think it was a joke. Or did I miss something? [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop I've removed this statement, which was added by a single user with no evidence, and does not seem to be true. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dbus_stopdiff=592417oldid=592409 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] importing bus stops
Anyone here with experience importing bus stops? Any particular considerations? I haven't imported any but I've tagged a bazillion of them. To make it more concrete, I have permission to import all UTA stops. They come in a shapefile similar to the one available for download here: http://gis.utah.gov/sgid-**vector-download/utah-sgid-** vector-gis-data-layer-**download-index?fc=BusStops_UTAhttp://gis.utah.gov/sgid-vector-download/utah-sgid-vector-gis-data-layer-download-index?fc=BusStops_UTA (That particular set of files is out of date, though) There's a number of properties that would map to OSM nodes pretty nicely: MAILBOX - create a separate node amenity= LIGHT - lit=yes SHELTER - shelter=yes BENCH - bench=yes (?) I looked at the shapefiles you linked to and didn't see any mailbox properties. I'd be wary of using an attribute like that to add mailbox nodes. How do you tell the location of the box relative to the stop unless they make sure they're very close before they mark that attribute that yes. Also, the file I looked at (SLC) only had null value for shelter and bench. Do the updated ones actually have some values there. Do you know what UTA is referring to in the CURB and GUTTER attributes? Again, the file I looked at only had zeros there. I always add shelter and bench information to the stops I tag. I also use a tag called ticker=yes/no to indicate if it has real time arrival data or not. So, lit, shelter and bench are all good tags to have if the data is there. How accurate is the coordinate data for those stop nodes? Is it good enough to indicate which corner the stop is at at an intersection, and which side of the corner? If it is that accurate awesome, if not the import just got a lot, lot harder to do correctly. Given all the info in the attributes for the stops (eg, direction and midblock etc) you could probably still make it work but not easily. If its really accurate though its good. Do you know if the location ID is publicly visible or only for backend purposes? In some places the stops have stop IDs that can be texted to 511 to get arrival times for the next bus or two. If these are public facing numbers I would throw them in a ref tag otherwise I would probably leave them out. I was planning to just use what I know which is highway=bus_stop for the bus stops, and railway=tram_stop for the light rail stops. But now I see that using highway=bus_stop is *very controversial*[1]! If it weren't so blatantly untrue I'd think it was a joke. Or did I miss something? To get back on topic, if anyone wants to help out devise a mapping from UTA stops file to OSM, I'd welcome some help. I've never done a local import before, and I'm not a particularly big fan of imports, so I want to proceed with caution. I use highway=bus_stop for all of my bus_stop tagging. As far as I know thats also how the public transit add on in JOSM handles them. The whole public_transport tag set feels like overkill to me. I don't see how having the bus stop node where the bus stop is as opposed to the on way is that hard to handle. Ideally the bus stops end up as part of route relations that make that explicit anyhow. -Greg ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] importing bus stops
From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:mve...@gmail.com] Subject: [Talk-us] importing bus stops Hi, Anyone here with experience importing bus stops? Any particular considerations? To make it more concrete, I have permission to import all UTA stops. They come in a shapefile similar to the one available for download here: http://gis.utah.gov/sgid-vector-download/utah-sgid-vector-gis-data- layer-download-index?fc=BusStops_UTA (That particular set of files is out of date, though) There's a number of properties that would map to OSM nodes pretty nicely: MAILBOX - create a separate node amenity= LIGHT - lit=yes SHELTER - shelter=yes BENCH - bench=yes (?) Unfortunately, all of these attributes are null. I was planning to just use what I know which is highway=bus_stop for the bus stops, and railway=tram_stop for the light rail stops. What differentiates them in the shapefile? I don't know the area so I don't know where there are any light rail stops To get back on topic, if anyone wants to help out devise a mapping from UTA stops file to OSM, I'd welcome some help. I've never done a local import before, and I'm not a particularly big fan of imports, so I want to proceed with caution. I threw together a draft translation file at https://github.com/pnorman/ogr2osm-translations/blob/master/utahbus.py To go farther, a local would need to provide some knowledge. 1. Are there unique ref numbers on the stops? Every bus stop here has a unique ID on its sign. If so, do these correspond to LOCATIONID? 2. What are the names of some bus stops? If they're named by the street they're on and the cross-street it should be possible to construct a name from the shapefile for each stop. (e.g. northbound far side 1st ave and main street) 3. The shapefile appears to have address data for each stop. Should the addr:*=* information be added? I also noticed a couple of other things when looking at the data. The spatial accuracy is decent. Some stops are a few meters off and on the road, not the sidewalk, but they're all near the shelters that I can see. Conflating this data with the existing data will be the hard part. If there hasn't been too much manual mapping of bus stops this could be done by hand. If there has, then you need to look at how to conflate the data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
