> I also created a proposal, but I knew in advance it wouldn't be practical > to duplicate full GTFS functionality in OSM.
Well, this is not a so simple question. There're many countries around the world that have no GTFS. And, it's just what happens to us in Brazil. We are mapping intercity bus routes in the state where I live. So, if we have this data in OSM, maybe we are going to be the pioneer. Do not map GTFS in OSM for me sounds like do not map building in city X because it's available in town hall. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_timetables I didn't follow the discussion but this proposal is at least helpfull. Why do not map xx:xx in the same route relation? Role examples: stop@00:20, stop_exit_only@03:45, stop_entry_only@00:25-00:31, and for bus stops where the timetable is approximated (like in Brazil) use "~" for the usual times, examples: stop@~00:27-00:30, stop_exit_only@~00:46 > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport_agencies It has gone to my wiki watchlist so I can follow it in its developing. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_schedules/Departures This proposal is as simple as possible and it's better to be so. However it doesn't cover all situations. For example, stops that have checkpoint, in another words, that have exact time to arrive and/or leave intermediaries stops. Many times only duration=* cannot be enough to accurate times in intermediaries stops. LeifRasmussen, what do you think about to attach "duration in roles" to complement the proposal? It is supposed to be used not in all stops, but only in those that have exact time to arrive/leave, or at least a well known usual time. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
