On 26 Feb 2009, at 10:51, Peter J Stoner wrote: > In message <[email protected] > m> > Frankie Roberto <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Peter Miller >> <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>> I do think we need to spend a bit more time bottoming this out at >>> this >>> stage before coding lots of interchanges. As we are aware the >>> professional >>> community has also looked at these same issues and we can learn >>> from them >>> and borrow from them as appropriate. >>> >>> With railways the decision seems to be to have a way per track and >>> then use >>> relations to bind these together for some rendering styles. This >>> same >>> approach can be used for dual carriageways and complex junctions, >>> even >>> though no one has actually done such a rendering to my knowledge. >>> > >> Ah, that's a nice method - I hadn't considered that option. It fits >> nicely >> with how bridges are beginning to be mapped with relations too. >> (though I >> haven't seen how renderers use this information yet). > >> I'm also going to have to use the relation method for a few trams >> near me, >> as the roads are set up so that one side of the road is tram-only >> (railway=tram, oneway=yes), but the other side is also open to road >> traffic >> (highway=unclassified, tram=yes, oneway=yes), sometimes buses and >> taxis only >> (highway=unclassified, tram=yes, oneway=yes, bus=yes, taxi=yes, >> motorcar=no). This looks a complete mess in renderers at the moment >> (see >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/? >> lat=53.478996&lon=-2.241334&zoom=18&laye >> rs=B000FTF >> ). > > >>> Knowing what I do about train enthusiasts and public transport >>> enthusiasts >>> I think we are going to end up with every set of tracks and points >>> in the >>> entire world in OSM! We might start with a single way through a >>> station and >>> ignore the fact that there are three platforms and six or more >>> actual sets >>> of tracks, but the coding will get more and more detailed as more >>> fanatical >>> people get hold of it! >>> > >> Indeed - I've started to do a few stations near me. One of the >> unsolved >> problems (to my mind), is how to add platforms numbers. ref=* has >> been >> suggested, but most island platforms usually have a different >> number for >> each side of the platform (sometimes even splitting the sides up as >> 1a, 1b, >> etc). See discussion here: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/ >> unified_stop >> area#Sheffield > > > There are some more ways that platforms are divided up: > > On the West Coast main line there are coloured zones, eg Gold Zone, > Purple Zone etc. > > National Express have tied laminated A4 signs to the lamp posts "Board > here for Coach x" - the problem with this is that this detail is > company and train type specific.
If this information is permanent signage then I don't see any reason for this information to not be added to the map. > > The Japaneze use the position on the platform to suggest where to > board in relation to the exit at the destination station. (see > www.navitime.com - for the London Underground) That would be quite neat. Shaun > > I believe Ifopt has something to say about this but am not up on the > detail. > > > > -- > Peter J Stoner > UK Regional Coordinator > Traveline www.travelinedata.org.uk > > a trading name of > Intelligent Travel Solutions Ltd company number 3826797 > Drury House, 34-43 Russell Street, LONDON WC2B 5HA > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-transit mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
