On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 02:12:35AM +0200, Cartinus wrote: > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 00:37:50 Frankie Roberto wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs > > infrastructure issue. > > > > IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping. > > For vehicles: > The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle. > The route bus 5 follows is route=bus. > The route tram 13 follows is route=tram. > The route the Eurostar follows is route=train. > > For infrastructure: > The "route" of the M1 is route=road > The "route" that is made up of the rail tracks of the East Coast Mainline is > route=rail. > > Deprecating route= and replacing it with line= for most things where we > currently use route= is a lot of work for no real gain.
Oxomoas proposal makes things more consistent: You have railway=rail railway=light_rail etc. and the corresponding relations are: line=rail line=light_rail It seems rather confusing to me to have: route=train corresponding to railway=rail and route=light_rail corresponding to railway=light_rail Thats why we decided to do it this way at the workshop in Karlsruhe. The way we introduced line=* was to make this consistent and at the same time mostly backwards compatible to current use. 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
