I think most of these issues stem from a few fields that were inadvertantly missed from the Birmingham area import. They were later corrected on the other regions within the West Midlands, but I witheld from doing a blanket fix since some of the Birmingham data had already been corrected by the time I realised. It was planned to merge in the missing tags at a later point through an automated change comparison process with the source data. My focus will be once again on the NaPTAN import in about a month.
On 26/05/2009, Peter Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 26 May 2009, at 18:09, Roger Slevin wrote: > >> Brian >> >> I would be very interested to have the evidence about the transposed >> stops if that is possible. Thanks. >> >> Do you not have access to “bearing” – it’s in the source data, but I >> am not sure what you have access to. I can certainly let you have a >> file with the bearing data in it, if you do not have access to this >> from anywhere else. > > I think the bearing must be one of the fields that has been 'culled' > during the import; personally I would consider it essential > information for the next import/update pass. Without that information > will be hard to know if the name/identifier or bearing should be > changed. It is actually necessary to have access to the schedules > themselves to know how the stops are being used. >> >> CUS is a fact of life – nothing I can offer in response to that. > > The Stop-Type field would indicate what sort of stop it is (CUS for > customary) if it had been imported. Without this information it is > hard to review the NaPTAN data well and provide hard-hitting feedback > on the data. > > I know that as the number of tags for a node increasing that it > becomes difficult for Potlatch to manage, but I think that we are > going to solve that one to get the most out of this data-set. Possibly > someone needs to talk to Richard. > > You can of course also check data you are not sure about using the ITO > NaPTAN service that we gave a few people in the area access to for > evaluation purposes during the initial import. That will reflect the > current data rather than the data at the time of the import and will > include all the tags including the ones that have not been imported > into OSM this time. > > > > Regards, > > > > Peter > > >> >> If stops have been removed – but not removed or replaced in NaPTAN – >> then I would again like evidence to take back to colleagues who >> maintain NaPTAN. It is possible that they have changed the stop >> sub-type from MKD to HAR – that is the preferred method of handling >> this situation in NaPTAN. A formal HAR record has an entry point, >> what I call an “anchor” point in the middle, and an exit point. The >> guidance tells editors that these should all fall on the same named >> road (but in practice we know that a lot of them do not adhere to >> this rule). What is almost certainly the case in almost every case >> is that the length of the HAR section is not the same as the full >> length of the road ... most well-created HAR records would have >> entry and exit points which are at least a few metres short of the >> road junctions at each end. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Roger >> >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected] >> ] On Behalf Of Brian Prangle >> Sent: 26 May 2009 17:19 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Talk-transit] NaPTAN data import in Birmingham update >> >> Having surveyed (and resurveyed) about three hundred bus stops I >> think I could draft (soon) a definitive report on how to proceed. >> >> There's also a few points to emerge about the Birmingham data >> >> 1. I'm coming across regular transpositon of stops from opposite >> sides of the road ( would be useful to have bearing data) >> 2. Not having the CUS marker on customary stops makes for hard work >> surveying and editing on estates where practically every other stop >> is CUS >> 3. Came across two routes (36 and 36C) where whole roads have had >> their bus stops physically removed (still showing as NaPTAN data) >> and the timetables show the roads as Hail and Ride zones. Couple of >> things here - I presume that actual practice has gone beyond the >> capacity of NapTAN data to keep pace ( I'll add the details to the >> NaPTAN error log on the mappamercia wiki shortly) and how do we >> import the HAR data - or represent it ( I can't remember where our >> previous discussions got to). In the meantime I'll probably just tag >> the roads as HAR=yes and HAR_route_ref= xx. (Without the timetable >> there's nothing visible on the ground to indicate to surveyors that >> they are in a HAR zone) >> >> Note for Thomas - I know you're into exam season - none of this is >> desperate - there's a few thousand more bus stops to survey and >> verify yet! >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-transit mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit > > -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
