In message <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAOKaD4mR3JBOrEpRon92nMgBANp/H2q5kHF
ivkmsnziqazaaaaabxjaaabaaaadev+w8ijfnqr6pnniwup8baqaaa...@googlemail.com>
"Andy Robinson \(blackadder-lists\)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Peter Miller [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter
> Miller wrote:
>>Sent: 01 April 2009 8:05 AM
>>To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
>>Cc: [email protected]; 'Brian Prangle'; Talk-gb-
>>[email protected]; [email protected]; 'Thomas
>>Wood'
>>Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Naptan alignment
>>
>>
>>On 31 Mar 2009, at 23:43, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
>>
>>
>> Roger Slevin [mailto:[email protected]] wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sent: 31 March 2009 11:20 PM
>>
>>
>> To: 'Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)'; 'Brian Prangle';
> Talk-
>>gb-
>>
>>
>> [email protected];
> [email protected];
>>'Thomas
>>
>>
>> Wood'
>>
>>
>> Subject: RE: [Talk-transit] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Naptan
>>alignment
>>
>>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>> "Custom and Practice" stops - that is stops which are not
>>physically marked
>>
>>
>> - are a common feature in many parts of the country ... less
> so
>>within
>>
>>
>> Metropolitan areas than in rural ones. And many are not
>>"signed in one
>>
>>
>> direction to represent both directions" - they are without
> any
>>sign. These
>>
>>
>> unmarked stops are stop type CUS in NaPTAN. I appreciate
> that
>>their
>>
>>
>> representation on a map might be conceptually challenging
> ...
>>but they are
>>
>>
>> essential points as far as bus passengers are concerned!
>>
>>
>>
>> I have no problem representing them on a map and indeed the whole
>>concept is
>> fine. Our challenge is one of verification. We essentially only put
>>data in
>> OSM that is physically there on the ground. However at least these
>>stops
>> have the "CUS" tag so it should be possible to verify that busses
>>stop at
>> the location and the evidence on the ground might then be the pile
> of
>>fag
>> ends in the gutter ;-)
>>
>>
>>I would have thought that in the UK the 'verification' of a customary stop
>>could initially be that the data is within NaPTAN and that it doesn't seem
>>unreasonable (ie it is not on a one-way street). Cigarette ends and people
>>standing around looking up the road might corroborate that information but
>>I suggest that they are not necessary where NaPTAN has provided data.
> I don't trust NaPTAN one jot ;-) It may be a great data set but until I've
> seen evidence that it matches reasonably what's on the ground I won't trust
> it any more than any other data source. At the moment I'm seeing a
> reasonable level of difference between the positional data and the location
> of the stop on the ground so we know at least this aspect needs work and
> there may be other aspects.
>From the Traveline point of view I hope that the data will not be
verified too readily as that would lose the opportunity to improve on
the NaPTAN data.
Since the NaPTAN data was collected over a number of years by
different people and the guidance on how to do it emerged after the
initial collection, we will find variations between areas. I know
some areas will have marked the pole even if it is at the back of the
pavement, and from a mapping point of view there is merit in doing so
in that it is the physical marker. However it is now regarded as
better practice where possible to mark the boarding point at the kerb
as in terms of navigation this is the exact point where a pedestrian
becomes a passenger. When I was arranging some surveying of bus stops
in Northumberland the surveyors put a small yellow on the kerb but
that backfired when one village thought we were about to introduce
parking restrictions.
In theory it would be great to have the flag exactly at the point of
boarding but of course to put it there will get in the way. There has
been mention of laybys but another indication is the raised kerbs that
some bus stops have.
>>
>>We should note that this import is getting attention from professionals and
>>that in the UK/ Transmodel because it is seen as 'The' essential link
>>between the timetables and the physical world and they have seen and
>>discussed a lot of unusual situations that need to be accommodated in the
>>past 10 years. I would suggest therefore that we see if we can accommodate
>>their requirements.
> I'm all ears, but my view is that the model needs to match the practice;
> regardless of what someone previously thought was a good idea.
The professionals don't need to be held in too much awe, rarely do
they discuss bus stops in as much detail as OSM.
--
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
