On 01/28/2011 11:59 AM, Richard Mann wrote:
1) How do you envisage the mapping of loops (ie (say) six stops on
one-way loop at one end of the route). I guess the two directions
could be combined, or an arbitrary break made at some point round the
loop. I think you need to suggest either one or the other or say that
both are acceptable as long as they are ordered.
You're talking about something like A-B-C-D-E-F-C-B-A, right?
I would say: if you expect the bus/train to travel from one stop to the
next with passengers on board, include both stops in the same relation.
Thinking about it, I would combine the two directions (if you can still
call them that way) into one relation. (Who knows, maybe with the next
timetable the company will introduce another route going
A-B-C-F-E-D-C-B-A, the exact opposite of the above - this would them
become the matching second relation).
2) I think you need to define some options for tram stops (including
what tags are on the single node on the track), and have a straw poll.
This morning I'm tending towards using railway=platform areas/ways as
stops (which is more consistent with existing tagging, and solves
Teddy's problem with trams and light_rail using the same platform).
As I said in my previous post, I'm open to discussing that, though I
personally find tram stops beside the way are more consistent with bus
stops. But collecting more opinions on this is probably a good idea -
I'll add it to the proposal page.
Michael
_______________________________________________
Talk-transit mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
