There's a clear definition - a coach has it's wheels attached to an underframe distinct from the bodywork. That's why they're higher and have a more-comfortable ride.
However there's an overlap caused by the 50km rule. I would surmise that the same threshold is used to require free access by freedom pass holders (over-65s). So I'd be inclined to call both route=bus, and use other tags (service=inter-urban/long-distance? vehicle=coach?) to distinguish them. Richard On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter Miller <peter.mil...@itoworld.com>wrote: > > On 5 Aug 2009, at 13:05, Frankie Roberto wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Roger Slevin <ro...@slevin.plus.com>wrote: > >> Before anyone answers your question, please bear in mind that there is >> no clear definition of a “coach” ... and I have dealt with a feedback to >> traveline on this very point only this morning. A limited stop service >> between Cambridge and Oxford operated by vehicles which have “coach-style” >> seats and which the operator refers to as “coaches” runs a limited stop >> service between the two cities (the X5) – so we call this a coach. The >> complaint came from someone who had been unable to find this service as a >> “bus” because he saw a “coach” as being something which you had to prebook, >> and which expected a significant number of passengers to have luggage which >> went into luggage lockers under (or at the back of) the vehicle. >> > > Whilst I agree that there's no hard-and-fast distinction between buses and > coaches, I think that using route=bus-coach is just going to confuse people! > > I'd suggest using either route=bus or route=coach, and simply going with > whichever feels most correct (based upon what the route calls itself or how > people generally refer to it). > > This doesn't resolve the potential ambiguities, but renderers and routing > software would be advised to use a bit leeway when doing searches. > > > I understood that one difference in the UK is if it was under 50km the > operator could reclaim tax on their fuel. There is also evidently a 50 km > rule about tachographs, where drivers operating longer routes need tachos, > but ones on shorter routes (urban buses) don't. > > I think it is also useful to distinguish the sort of seating. I was on a > coach last week, big leather seats and air-conditioning - very comfortable > and reasonably quick. No toilet which surprised me, but it was only a 1 hour > journey so I guess that is fair-enough. The experience of using a normal > urban bus would have been very poor in comparison and I wouldn't have taken > it. > > > Personally I would vote for the distinction to be retained on the basis of > the distance and type of vehicle. > > > Regards, > > > > peter > > > > > Frankie > > -- > Frankie Roberto > Experience Designer, Rattle > 0114 2706977 > http://www.rattlecentral.com > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-transit mailing list > Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-transit mailing list > Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit