That makes sense. So if a bus stop has one or more relations added, should it be counted as equivalent to a route_ref tag in the colour scheme, i.e. not marked as needing a route_ref tag?<br><br>You could also check if there are relations matching up to route_ref entries for areas where they were put in.<br>
<br>Tom<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 24 March 2010 08:13, Shaun McDonald <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shaun@shaunmcdonald.me.uk">shaun@shaunmcdonald.me.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word;">The route ref is an interim data level until the relations are added. Think of it as house numbers being initially added as points, and then full building outlines being added at a later stage at which point the building number gets transferred to the building outline.<div>
<br></div><div>Shaun</div><div><br><div><div><div></div><div class="h5"><div>On 24 Mar 2010, at 07:58, Tom Chance wrote:</div><br></div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div></div><div class="h5"><p>That all sounds good, though if we add stops to route relations do they really need route_ref?</p>
<p>Tom<br>
</p><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite">On Mar 23, 2010 10:26 PM, "Christoph Böhme" <<a href="mailto:christoph@b3e.net" target="_blank">christoph@b3e.net</a>> wrote:<br><br>Tom Chance <<a href="mailto:tom@acrewoods.net" target="_blank">tom@acrewoods.net</a>> schrieb:<br>
<p><font color="#500050">
> On 23 March 2010 13:20, Christoph Boehme <<a href="mailto:christoph@b3e.net" target="_blank">christoph@b3e.net</a>> wrote:
>
> > Well, I just updated t...</font></p>Yes, exactly. My current plan is to have four types of stops in the<br>
basic scheme:<br>
<br>
1. Non-NaPTAN stops: Stops without naptan:*-tags. Basically plain<br>
old OSM bus stops.<br>
2. Unverified NaPTAN stops: Stops from the NaPTAN import which<br>
have a naptan:verified=no tag or which are missing the<br>
highway=bus_stop tag.<br>
3. Verified NaPTAN stops: Stops tagged as hightway=bus_stop and with<br>
either no naptan:verified tag or a naptan:verified=yes tag.<br>
4. CUS-stops: Stops with naptan:BusStopType=CUS because they are not<br>
marked on the ground and cannot be verified.<br>
<br>
Extended schemes would be:<br>
<br>
1. Stops with notes: Highlight stops with a note or naptan:error tag<br>
2. Route information: Highlight stops which are missing the route_ref<br>
tag.<br>
3. Shelter and asset refs: Highlight bus stops which have shelter=yes<br>
and no asset_ref or which have no shelter tag at all (this might be<br>
quite Birmingham specific).<br>
4. Anything else?<br>
<br>
I suggest to keep the old schemes but rename them to the name of the<br>
public transport network they apply to (e.g. "Transport West Midlands"<br>
for Birmingham), since they are based on the amount of information that<br>
is available on the signs used by a particular network.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<font color="#888888">Christoph<br>
</font><p><font color="#500050">
> Best,
> Tom
>
> --
> <a href="http://tom.acrewoods.net/" target="_blank">http://tom.acrewoods.net</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/tom_chance" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/tom_chance</a>
</font></p></blockquote><div><br></div></div></div><div class="im">
_______________________________________________<br>Talk-GB mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://tom.acrewoods.net">http://tom.acrewoods.net</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/tom_chance">http://twitter.com/tom_chance</a><br>