Thank you for sharing your thoughts 🙂 06-Mar-2020 17:40:23 Andrew Harvey :
> I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for > downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route), could > this be optional so you can create a public transport route relation via > waypoints only if you prefer as a starting point, but then still allow it to > be completed via the way members. > A bit like how most things can be initially mapped as a node but then are > usually expanded out into an area. I'm afraid I'm against that idea, personally. I've mapped nearly 70 bus routes in my city (and counting); I'm still their lone maintainer; I have also dabbled with mapping railway routes. So many relations with so many ways - especially highways, which are the first things newbies edit and thus are the most likely to break a relation - are an enormous maintenance bomb waiting to go off. (And sometimes it does go off, and the fallout goes on for months.) Besides - while I have never written a router or a renderer - I imagine that having to support both types of relations (PTv3 as well as v2) would create additional technical debt for routers and renderers. > Secondly I don't quite understand the no way member rule of your proposal, > since railways platforms should be a way > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=platform > [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=platform] then including the > platform in the relation means you need to include ways as relation members. Thank you for pointing that out. The ways it referred to were highways and railways - it has, of course, no objection to platforms as ways or areas. I have reworded the section, hopefully it is clearer. > On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 at 21:08, John Doe < music.kash...@gmail.com > [mailto:music.kash...@gmail.com] > wrote: > > > > > Stereo and I have been working on a schema that makes it easier to create > > and maintain public transport route relations. We would like to invite > > feedback, questions, and suggestions, so it can mature and hopefully gain > > widespread use. > > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simpler_public_transport_route_relations > > > > [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simpler_public_transport_route_relations] > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org [mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > [https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging] > > > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
