Before this becomes standard, could someone please make a script to transform one tagging scheme in an other? Not for uploading, just because apps have difficulties to support all the different tagging schemes. And after all, we want the data to be useful. Op 11-jan.-2011 10:35 schreef "Claudius Henrichs" <[email protected]> het volgende: > Am 11.01.2011 08:03, Michał Borsuk: >> >> >> On 11 January 2011 07:24, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi all >> >> One month ago I already posted an RFC on this proposal. In the >> meantime I got plenty of comments and I have >> extended/corrected/rewritten nearly the whole proposal. >> >> Please visit again >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport >> >> >> This: >> >> * The route-Relation >> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements#Relation> is split >> up into two separate *direction*-Relation >> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements#Relation>s and >> separate route *variants*, if required. >> * The *route master*-Relation >> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements#Relation> contains >> all the relations for the route directions and variants >> >> ...is a copy of oxomoa, which has been criticized as overbloated. Why >> was it kept in the new draft? What are the arguments for two relations >> in each direction? > I don't feel it to be bloated instead it's necessary, needed and > practically in use. And especially for the "simple" or new mapper it > seems way easier to create two relations for each direction than messing > with forward/backward roles. > Arguments for relations in each direction: > - easier to check correctness and completeness (simply select each > direction's relation in JOSM) > - easier to manage routes where the vehicle takes different routes and > stops in each direction > ... > I already see it's more a question of taste here, but I feel it's more > elegant to work with seperated relations for each direction. And less > stressfull when using a 300 members opposed to a 500+ member relation. > From a short test it seems like P2 does work fine with nested relations > so that's no counter-argument anymore. > > The type=route_master thingie is new to me, but I prefer it over Oxomoa > which recycled route=line for the master and it's members and thus mixed > the two levels. > > I strongly support this proposal which 90% reflect how I'm currently > mapping in Europe and Asia. > Claudius
_______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
