<div dir="ltr">Rob <br><div dir="ltr"><div>I'm replying to Ed Loach and IpswichMapper specifically here.<br><br></div>Ed Loach:<br><br><div style="margin-left:40px">>
I am one of those that removes the tag after a survey, but if I
encounter a bus stop with a tag on and can align it better based on the
aerial imagery we didn't have in 2009 I leave the tag value set to "no".
Verified really requires a visit for things like determining whether
there is a timetable case/raised kerb/shelter/bench/waste_basket and all those other attributes that are gathered when verifying the naptan location/stop name/bus stop type/status.<span class="gmail-im"></span><br></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im"></span></div>
<br></div><div>I've seen some confusion as to the actual purpose of `naptan:verified` - I thought I was simply `"verify this bus stop exists" but some people have said that I'd have to verify all the naptan data match reality? As long as name/ref/local_ref match and a stop exists, I'm gonna set it to yes :)</div><div><br></div><div><div style="margin-left:40px">>
I would suggest naptan:RevisionNumber would be easier to use to be able
to simply compare the values in OSM to Naptan to spot any that have
changed easier.<span class="gmail-im"></span><br></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im"></span></div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">Ooh, good suggestion. I'll start adding that on any that I touch. I have been working on <b>Kent</b>, doing it one by one by each LocalityName. I've been using all resources at my disposal, using the Land Registry layer to align imagery (provided by Rob Nickerson), looking for markings on the road or bus shelters near the new NaPTAN GPS coordinates. <br><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">I would highly encourage others to work on their areas and update the data. The downloads can be found here: <a href="https://naptan.app.dft.gov.uk/datarequest/help">https://naptan.app.dft.gov.uk/datarequest/help</a><br><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">IpwichMapper:<br></span><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im"><br>>
The "naptan:Indicator" tag is effectively the same as the "local_ref"
tag. Therefore, the "NaPTAN indictor" should be imported into both of
those tags.
<br></span></div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">Even for values like o/s, adj and opp? :) Happy to start adding those.</span></div><div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im">>
The last worry I have is about bus stops that were added after the
import. What about them? Importing data again would lead to duplicates. <br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">Not a perfect solution but MapRoulette challenges to clean up duplicates could be created.<br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im">>
The "Traveline National Dataset" is released under the Open Government License. This means that <b>bus routes</b>
can also be imported into OSM (by linked all the stops listed in a
timetable together in a route relation). Yes, there won't be any ways,
this will have to be added manually. However, even with just bus stops
in the relation, apps like OSMand can display bus routes & create
public transport navigation using just relations with bus stop nodes. In
fact, Google also probably only has access to bus stop nodes, however,
it creates a driving route between two bus stops automatically so that
users can see the physical route a bus takes (in fact something like
this could potentially be done with a JOSM routing plugin, making it
much easier to add ways to the relation). <br></span></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">This is huge! How do we get started? (I want to finish updating NaPTAN data first, but then I wanna get bus routes for my local area added asap.)</span></div><div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">That's actually kind of why I started updating NaPTAN data in Kent. I went to upgrade my bus routes near me and spotted that some bus stops were wrong/outdated/missing.</span></div><div><span class="gmail-im"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">Anyhoo, I think that's all I have to add right now</span></div><div><span class="gmail-im">J<br></span></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 12:47, <<a href="mailto:ipswichmapper@tutanota.com">ipswichmapper@tutanota.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>This would be great. Bus stop and public transport data is tedious to map, and it is also woefully out of date. <br></div><div><br></div><div>There isn't much need to know bus routes anymore to map them, you can easily do it using a website like <a href="https://bustimes.org" target="_blank">https://bustimes.org</a> which simply pulls data from NaPTAN.<br></div><div><br></div><div>If we were to do this import again, it should be done RIGHT:<br></div><div><br></div><ol><li>The "naptan:Indicator" tag is effectively the same as the "local_ref" tag. Therefore, the "NaPTAN indictor" should be imported into both of those tags.<br></li><li>The "Traveline National Dataset" is released under the Open Government License. This means that <b>bus routes</b> can also be imported into OSM (by linked all the stops listed in a timetable together in a route relation). Yes, there won't be any ways, this will have to be added manually. However, even with just bus stops in the relation, apps like OSMand can display bus routes & create public transport navigation using just relations with bus stop nodes. In fact, Google also probably only has access to bus stop nodes, however, it creates a driving route between two bus stops automatically so that users can see the physical route a bus takes (in fact something like this could potentially be done with a JOSM routing plugin, making it much easier to add ways to the relation).<br></li><li>As mentioned already, this time "highway=bus_stop" and "public_transport=platform" must be added to each stop.<br></li><li>The last worry I have is about bus stops that were added after the import. What about them? Importing data again would lead to duplicates.<br></li></ol><div>Thanks,<br></div><div>IpswichMapper<br></div><div> --<br></div><div><br></div><div>15 Feb 2021, 20:34 by <a href="mailto:jaynicholasturner@gmail.com" target="_blank">jaynicholasturner@gmail.com</a>:<br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="auto"><div>I have a few questions regarding the 2009 NAPTAN import. <br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">On the <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Import" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">wiki </a>it states: <i>"The Department required that the official identifier for each feature ("atcocode" in the case of a bus stop) is included in the imported data to allow the movement of these features to be tracked over time and for updates to potentially be added in the future. We do have this as a tag on imported bus stops."<br></i></div><div>Sadly, much of the UK hasn't been touched since the
NaPTAN
data was imported. (<a href="https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/13Gq" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">82202</a> / <a href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/naptan:AtcoCode?filter=nodes" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">230474</a>) 35%<br></div><div><div>I don't really know how to analyse the data of the other 65% but I'll place a bet it's not in a great state. Additionally, 95% of all `naptan:verified` tags are `no`.<br></div></div><div><div><b>I want to know if it's possible to reimport/mass update NaPTAN data from the latest set of information</b>. Additionally, I propose a few extra tags;<br></div><div> - `source:date=*` with the `ModificationDateTime` field within the NaPTAN datasets so we have a good idea of when the data was last touched.<br></div></div><div> - `public_transport=*` because... well yeah. We have that now. We didn't in 2009.<br></div><div> - `unsigned=yes` for bus stops with BusStopType=CUS because it's defined as <i>"Unmarked stop (or only marked on the road). Point footprint.". </i>Previously, these stops weren't tagged with highway=bus_stop and I think we should add those en-mass too. Leaving those tags off has led to confusion with mappers unfamiliar with NaPTAN and caused the nodes to be blindly deleted or merged into other objects.<i></i><br></div><div><br></div><div><b>A lot has changed since 2009, we now have tools to help us find and spot data issues on the ground such as StreetComplete</b>. There's a discussion on GitHub about doing something with these tags to help verify it on the ground. That can be found here: <a href="https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/2566" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/2566</a><br></div><div><br></div><div><div>TL;DR: I think we need to mass update NaPTAN data regularly and use StreetComplete or MapRoulette to verify the import and reduce the count of `naptan:verified=no`.<br></div></div><div><div>FYI, I think the correct tagging for verified is `naptan:verified=yes` - I know some people delete the tag.<br></div></div><div>Thank you for reading my incoherent ramble,<br></div><div>JayTurnr<br></div><div><div><br></div></div><div><div><br></div></div><div><i></i><br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div> </div>
</blockquote></div></div>