On 7/24/2012 10:32 AM, Jo wrote:
Well, to be honest, I had hoped that everybody who is doing PT would
have been screaming for this by now. It's a message on talk-fr by
somebody who wants to start doing this for cycle route relations that
triggered me into proposing it yet again. I have proposed it already
when the PT scheme was introduced, but they didn't want to include it
back then, as they feared it might be hard enough already to get it
passed, without it.
Of course it's an extra layer in the hierarchy, but it would be a lot
more logical than the way it's done now. As far as adding complexity
goes, it would actually reduce the number of relations a particular way
would be part of.
Somebody told me they got a bit scared after seeing this video:
I see what you're referring to now.
At one time I had fantasies of turning my OSM routes + a GTFS tool
that works with OSM data over to the local transit authority to use with
OpenTripPlanner. However when I performed the steps to modify a route
by adding a loop in the center, I was quickly corrected.
While they'll be able to use OpenTripPlanner, their future work will
be with some general GTFS management tool, not OSM.
_______________________________________________
Talk-transit mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
