> On 01/24/2011 12:40 PM, Christian wrote: > > On 23.01.2011 13:18, Michał Borsuk wrote: > > >> No, this can't be done in such detail, but it's not > necessary as of > >> 2011. All you need to know is where is the bus stop for > the direction > >> you're interested in, or whether the bus stop you found serves you > >> correctly. All the rest is done by the routing software. > [...] > > I'm sorry, but saying it is not necessary seems very arrogant to me. > > Maybe it is not necessary for what you want to use OSM for, > but that > > doesn't mean that we can't use it for something else. Last time I > > checked, OSM was open and everybody was able to map > whatever they wanted. > > Not at all. Nowhere it is written that anarchy is encouraged. > If it were, I would have already applied what *I* think is > proper, instead of finding a common solution. > > If disagree then please attack my arguments with > counter-arguments. I stand by what I wrote.
Well, I could agree with you that your proposal is fine for most usage cases. But below you say it yourself, the direction is lost, so for all those usage cases where people would like the direction your proposal isn't working. > > > Thinking about the 100+ messages about this topic, this > might actually > > be the reason for the problems in finding a good proposal. > > You have an idea of what you want to do with the data and you think > > that everybody else wants to do the same stuff. That's not the case! > > I am aware of this. Sometimes the minority is correct. I'm not sure if there is a right or wrong here. Its just different ways to use the data. > > > People will want to use the data in different ways and that > is fine, > > so what we need is a public transport proposal that allows > everybody > > to map whatever they want to map. That includes people like you who > > only want the bus stops, but it also includes people like > Vincent or > > me who would like to map also physical path a bus takes on > the street. > > My proposal does cover that. A simple bus line will be mapped > as it was before, with the minor exception that the route > will not contain the direction (you don't need that as a > user) - but the stops will. I have to read your proposal again, maybe I missed something. I thought your proposal wouldn't allow me to see the exact roads a bus travels on between two stops. If that is the case and the road between two stops is known with your proposal, just not the direction, how about changing/amending your proposal to add an *optional* argument or maybe a relation somewhere to store the direction? If someone wants the direction (for whatever reason) they could still be 100% compatible with your proposal but do some extra work and also get the direction - which only makes sense when the roads are different depending on the direction. Christian _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
