> editors would have to take similar precautions with nodes. Not impossible, > but it would take time to appear. Your scheme will be more fragile than the > existing one, at least for a while.
Well yes, any change will take some work by the maintainers of editor applications, so we should not make changes lightly. But this should not prevent us from making a change which would make things easier for mappers and might better represent reality. Greater ease of mapping is a strong reason to consider changes to editor applications. - Joseph Eisenberg On 3/8/20, Paul Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 8 Mar 2020 at 11:45, Guillaume Rischard <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> On ride_and_hail: in my experience, those are unambiguously definable by >> points such as intersections or POIs. Drivers connect the dots with the >> only possible path. If it’s ambiguous, you tell the drivers they always >> have to go via village x or pass poi y – in other words, you add a via >> point. >> > > You are using a different (and somewhat illogical) version of "hail and > ride" here. > On a hail and ride section of a route, the route is predetermined and fixed > but the bus will stop to pick up anywhere along it, not just at official, > marked > stops. You HAIL the bus with some sort of gesture, the bus stops, you get > on > AND RIDE. > > What you're describing is a route which has optional stops: when you board > the bus you say you want to get off at X and the bus takes an optional > detour to go past X; if there is nobody on the bus who wants to stop at X > then the bus takes its normal route which does not pass X. Anybody > waiting at point X to hail the bus is going to be out of luck if there's > nobody on the bus who wants to get off there. This cannot be described > as hail and ride because you could wait all day at X hoping to hail a bus > that never appears. It usually appears in timetables as "Stops at X > by request" or some such. > >> >> Some ride_and_hail routes are only like that on sections, and this is >> where I’d particularly like to have your ideas. Have nodes with roles >> ‘ride_and_hail:start’ and ‘ride_and_hail:stop’? >> > > You'd have to have something like that. Which means it's starting to get > complicated. > > What worries me about this scheme is that nodes are more fragile than ways. > Major editors recognize when ways are part of a route relation and stop you > doing some of the common things that would break the relation. For your > scheme to be workable, editors would have to take similar precautions with > nodes. Not impossible, but it would take time to appear. Your scheme will > be more fragile than the existing one, at least for a while. > > -- > Paul > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
