On 01/22/2011 08:38 PM, Michał Borsuk wrote:
On 01/22/2011 09:32 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote:
- stop_area is not needed/too complicated:
[...]And it does not seam to be too complicated,
>
And as for "not needed": can we have a *separate discussion* on how
routing works? There had already been voices that stop_area isn't really
necessary, and while I don't claim to be pro in routing software, I am
pretty sure we don't need them.
For routing we do not need them, you are right. And we do not need them
if all of the attributes are already tagged at the relations members.
But you can tag the shared and identical attributes of all relations
members only to the relation instead of all members (if you want).
In the proposal all these tags are attributed with the sentence
"recommended if no public_transport=stop_area exists". So if you like,
leave away the stop_area and tag all shared attributes to all nodes/ways.
The more exact the OSM map is, the
more likely it is that the two directions do not share the same way for
the both directions (the lines of one street are split up).
Again, this is not an argument as OSM is not a routing software, but a map.
Exactly, OSM is a map. And on a map I want to be able to read the route
of a public transport service.
- route directions/variants is too complicated:
My opinion is: The roles forward/backward in the current tagging schema
is complicated and very, very error-prone.
Then let's drop them altogether.
I agree with that!
Teddych
_______________________________________________
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
