There are some bus routes in my region where the bus needs to reverse into a 
narrow road even with passengers aboard, and more frequently in case of 
minibuses, for example:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3174915

[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]<https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3174915>

Relation: ‪MTR Bus K66 (Long Ping → Tai Tong)‬ (‪3174915 
...<https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3174915>
www.openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap is the free wiki world map. Updated 朗業街 Long Yip Street and Wang 
Lok Street junction.

In the route, the bus need to turn left into Kiu Hing Road and reverse to the 
terminus.



Sent from Outlook.com


________________________________
From: Jo <[email protected]>
Sent: 29 May 2018 03:38
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] new role for route relations: reverse

I have also mapped many routes with loops, lollipops/spoons where the same ways 
are traversed multiple times. But I had not encountered a route where the bus 
needs to do parts driving backwards. I think this is mostly avoided because 
it's (obviously) a dangerous maneuver. (and I would say especially if you have 
to do it multiple times per day)

Jo

2018-05-28 19:33 GMT+02:00 Johnparis 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Replying specifically to this point:

Sure, renderers and routers might cope with the bus going to point X and 
magically
switching its direction of travel by 180 degrees but it's a bit puzzling for 
data
consumers.  Does the bus go out of service there?  Is it a terminus?  Has the 
mapper
made a big mistake in the route?  Did some other mapper come along and
accidentally delete part of the route?  Etc.

I have mapped a fairly significant number of routes where exactly that happens. 
The bus enters a way and exits the way, traversing it twice. It seems to me to 
be nothing out of the ordinary.

But if this might really be a problem for consumers, you could add a 
description=* tag to the way rather than the note=* that I suggested. If this 
is the main reason for the proposed role, I would not be in favor of it. The 
second traversal is not really "reverse" in any sense. The traverses the way 
forward (south to north, say) the first time and the other direction (north to 
south) the second time. The traversals are consecutive. Totally normal in my 
view.






On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Paul Allen 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Erkin Alp Güney 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Does it have any stops in the street it reverses into?

Not that I've seen.  But if somebody asked to get off there I'm fairly sure 
that most of the
drivers would permit it.  And since it backs as far as a bench, I'm also fairly 
sure most
drivers would let somebody sat on the bench waiting for the bus to board there.

If not, it is not formally a part of the route and just a convention.

Yes, but without it the route involves a role called "magic_turntable."

If this were an end of route turnaround at a terminus then it's not mappable.  
What
happens when passengers are not on board and the bus is technically out of 
service
are not part of the route.  But this is done with passengers on board in the 
middle of
the route.

Sure, renderers and routers might cope with the bus going to point X and 
magically
switching its direction of travel by 180 degrees but it's a bit puzzling for 
data
consumers.  Does the bus go out of service there?  Is it a terminus?  Has the 
mapper
made a big mistake in the route?  Did some other mapper come along and
accidentally delete part of the route?  Etc.

Unless having role=reverse is going to cause big problems for renderers or
routers I don't see any problem with having it.  I doubt it's going to get used
often, so it's not a problem regarding data storage.  But I could be wrong.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to