<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">Hi all,<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">I have had some recent feedback
regarding my changes to the ferry route paths in Sydney Harbour in August this
year. I basically changed the mapping from
single way approach to relation approach.
The main reason for this change was so that the ferry route paths could
be used for routing purposes, to reflect what is actually happening on the “ground”
with these ferry route services.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">The feedback I received from the OSM
user is that these ferry routes should be mapped back to single way approach as
having ways intersecting/branching between terminals/wharves should not be
allowed. Rather, there should only be a single way between wharves. At the moment some routing engines take turns
in the middle of the harbour (<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=-33.8471%2C151.1852%3B-33.8385%2C151.1760#map=16/-33.8434/151.1907">example</a> – now fixed in database) which I
agree is not ideal. I have tried to map
the ways to avoid this as much as possible.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">I feel that I’m following the wiki <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route=ferry">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route=ferry</a> with the relation approach. At the time that I made the changes, I got
only minimal (all positive) feedback regarding my approach to this. But I can also understand the reasoning
behind why the single way approach is preferred, as it looks better from a
cartographic point of view on the standard OSM map tiles and gives a good
overview of the ferry routes.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">Unfortunately mapping with the single
way approach does not give options for accurate routing based on the way the
actual ferry services operate.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">The idea was brought forward to apply
custom tagging to the “new” ways that have been mapped based on the relation
approach. These custom tags (i.e.
route=[custom tag]) could then be used in conjunction with single way approach
ways for routing based on services. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">I am not saying this is ideal, but I
am willing to look at any compromise that could be perhaps suit everybody.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">So my question is, is it possible to
tag with custom tagging (i.e. route=ferry_services) or any of the existing tags
<a href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags</a>? That would mean that routing engines like
graphHopper could keep using the route=ferry for it’s ‘A’ to ‘B’ foot routing.<b><span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">I think that moving forward, there
will be the need for relation approach (routable) ferry route paths. App devs and transport agencies will have
need to use these ways for routing. Obviously, this is my opinion, so I would
really appreciate your views on this. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal">Thank you<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 23:42, Andrew Harvey <<a href="mailto:andrew.harvey4@gmail.com">andrew.harvey4@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I think so long as there's an active ferry route running between two terminals then it should have a route=ferry[1] connecting them, roughly following the actual geometry the route normally takes. Where you have a ferry route that sometimes has a few variants, eg. sometimes skips a terminal, or sometimes goes to a different wharf, then that can be accounted for using the ferry route relation.<div><br></div><div>As the wiki points out[1], this could be a simple way, or a route relation[2]</div><div><br></div><div><div>[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry</a></div></div><div>[2] <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route</a></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 6 August 2018 at 23:20, Sigurjón Gísli Rúnarsson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sjonni11@gmail.com" target="_blank">sjonni11@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Hi,</span></span><span></span></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">I would like to
amend the Ferry routes in NSW, particularly in and around Sydney using a
different approach.</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">At the moment the
Ferry routes are mapped with a <b>single way approach,</b> by <span style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">tagging a single way drawn along the whole route
(i.e. Circular Quay to Manly). The only benefit for the single line
approach, that I can see, is that it is simple and represents well on the map
tiles. The problem with this approach is that it does not allow ways to
share different routes and or variants. </span></span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">That’s
where my particular problem lies. When I try to generate route paths from
GTFS Sydney Ferries and private ferries (TfNSW) using the OSM Ferry route paths
as the routing network, a lot of errors occur. Many variants/trips in the
GTFS dataset, which are based on recent timetable information from Sydney
Ferries and other private operators, have no routing options. This is
because of the single way approach between wharves. </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">For
example, F4 Watsons Bay – Pyrmont via Rose Bay and Circular Quay: To go from
Rose Bay to Circular Quay the routing takes you around the harbour (Taronga
Zoo, Milsons Point, Balmain and Darling H) before getting to CQ Wharf 5.
Instead, there should be a direct route displayed between Rose Bay and Circular
Quay</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Another
example is that one ferry service might use wharf 5 at Circular Quay, but 20%
of the trips/variants might use wharf 4. Those 20% of trips/variants will not
route to and from the correct wharf using the single way approach.</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">To
be able to use the OSM Ferry route network for routing using GTFS files from
TfNSW, I want to map based on the <b>relation approach</b>. Just like
other transport modes are being mapped in OSM (i.e. bus routes).</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">This
would mean that more than one ferry route could share some ways, enabling users
to extract OSM ferry routes to use for routing.</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">I
would like to get thoughts from OSM users on this approach before I start
mapping in such way.</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br></span></span></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Regards,</span></span><span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><span class="m_6963603032348100721m_-400812713701423133gmail-size"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Maradona11</span></span><span></span></p></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote></div>