<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 14 Sep 2009, at 22:55, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Peter Miller wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Sent: 14 September 2009 10:12 PM<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Cc: 'Christoph Böhme'; <a href="mailto:talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] NOVAM Viewer<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On 14 Sep 2009, at 18:02, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Peter Miller wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sent: 10 September 2009 3:29 PM<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">To: Christoph Böhme<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cc: <a href="mailto:talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org</a><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] NOVAM Viewer<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 9 Sep 2009, at 22:06, Christoph Böhme wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi!<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div>snip</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#144FAE"><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#540000"><br></font></font></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Please can you disable the requirement for the route_ref tag for the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">benefit of the great unwashed who live in parts of the world that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">spend less on their bus stops than dear Brum.<br></blockquote><br>Well, we have to be ahead of the curve sometimes ;-)<br><br>One other thing worth bearing I mind. I've noted that on some streets some<br>stops are used by some routes but other stops are used for other routes.<br>This assuming that a bus stops at all stops along the same street need not<br>always be correct. Where it’s a terminus it's easy to see this because its<br>generally noted at the stop. Elsewhere its not so obvious except that I<br>presume the bus timetable, if displayed, would note which services stop at<br>the particular stop in question.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Correct. For busy corridors they need to parallel up the bus stops so that multiple buses can be loading at the same time and there may be three stops in a row with bus services allocated across them suitable to avoid any particular stop being overloaded.</div><div><br></div><div>Also... traditional paper bus timetables only show some stops on the route (the timing points) because the full list of stops would be too long and this same format of information is sometimes used within in the timetable case and in these cases it is not possible from the published information to establish the calling pattern with certainty. In the past the system relied in part on information passed form person to person and only recently has a serious attempt been made to capture this electronically.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Peter</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I am not sure that the shelter tag should be essential. I have added<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">it if there is a shelter and left it off if there is not. Could you<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">represent in the symbol if it is a shelter, but not use shelter=yes/<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">no<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">as a requirement for the stop being green<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Forcing the shelter to be yes of no I find a useful check for<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">situations<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">where I added data some time ago and need to go back and wrap up<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">verification. But I agree, its not something that needs to be<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">"required"<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I am comfortable to go round adding shelter=no tags - not too much<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">work and it do add information. However I won't unless the requirement<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">for the route_ref tag goes because otherwise I can't get NOVAM to help<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">me.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">A stop is considered a plain naptan stop (blue) if it has<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>NO highway-tag<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>AND a naptan:AtcoCode-tag<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>AND a naptan:unverified-tag OR a naptan:verified=no.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">But our import had highway=bus_stop turned on - it would be much more<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">useful for most people to ignore that tag for this test.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I guess Christoph is going to need to deal with the West mids folks<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">who have<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the data imported without the bus_stop attribute and everyone else<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">does.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Plain OSM stops (yellow) must have<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>a highway-tag<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>AND NO naptan:AtcoCode.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Fine<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">And finally there is the concept of a physically not present stop<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">(grey). This is a bit unfinished as we have not really decided<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what to<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">do with these stops. At the moment a stop classifies as not<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">physically<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">present if it has<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>NO highway-tag (to prevent it from showing up on the map)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>AND a naptan:atcoCode-tag<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>AND a physically_present tag set to 'no'.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">This would be very useful to show<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Yep, there are lots of customary stops in the NaPTAN data in housing<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">estates<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">which don’t have any physical presence.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">And in my town they are terrible for getting them all mixed up - many<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">of the ones they say are customary are really there and vice versa, so<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">it will be handy to have a clear presentation.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">All remaining stops are displayed as an orange stop. This is a bit<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">of<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">catch-all which does not actually display merged stops but<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">everything<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that is not explicitely marked finished or *not* merged.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On the basis of the above comments all my stops are orange which is<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">less that optimal!<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">We could do with some more documentation! And then starting to<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">publicise it maybe?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">A number of people started using it (at least I am constantly<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">receiving<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">error reports when people try to use the not yet implemented<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">functions).<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">After talking to Brian last Thursday I have decided to not develop<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">actual merger any further as merging can easily be done with josm.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Also, things like stop areas add lots of complexity to the merging<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">process and it would be difficult to implement this all. So, I will<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">concentrate on improving the viewer which seems to be very helpful.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">That sounds good. I found the 'merge' and save buttons rather scary<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">and wasn't sure if I had merged things or not, and if so how it knew<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">my user name etc. Personally, a straight viewer seems to be the best<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">tool. I would click on a stop expecting to see details of its tagging<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">and the icon would disappear for something to do with merging I later<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">realised.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">+1, viewing only is fine for me.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I am glad it's not just me!<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Regards,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Peter<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote>cheers<br><br>Andy<br><br><br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>