I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good
clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised here
in the past.
It looks like it's somewhat compatible with the european
Transmodel/IFOPT standards which is a promising step. As others have
noted, where possible we want to keep terminology close to existing
standards, so to simplify things when working with data providers and
those in the transit industry in the future, although this should not
block access to the standard OSMer.

One concern I have (and one that's probably been expressed many times
on talk@ etc) is the use of disused=*, rather than adjusting the
'primary' tag on the feature. (eg, railway=disused disused=light_rail
etc)

Anyway, well done, when I get my exams for this summer over with, I'll
be pleased to try getting the NaPTAN data (more) in-line with whatever
revision of this spec we have by then.

On 28/05/2009, Jochen Topf <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The weekend before last we had a workshop in Karlsruhe, Germany on the
> topic of public transport in OSM. The idea was to bring interested
> people together to improve the modelling of public transport
> infrastructure and networks in OSM.
>
> The results have now been documented. See
> http://blog.geofabrik.de/?p=23 for details.
>
> Jochen
> --
> Jochen Topf  [email protected]  http://www.remote.org/jochen/
> +49-721-388298
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to