<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 4 Aug 2009, at 23:37, Frankie Roberto wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">Hi all,<br><br>I'm still keen to try and nail this public transport service vs infrastructure issue.<br></blockquote><div><br></div>I have create a new wiki-page 'Public transport schema 2' based on Oxomoa's proposal on the main wiki based on the last edit made before the big revert. I have added a bit of information about the relation you refer to in the 'infrastructure' section , but more is needed:-</div><div><a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport_schema_2">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport_schema_2</a></div><div><br></div><div>This is very much a proposal to discuss and develop which I see it as being the top-level transit description which links out to more detailed articles (some of which already exist) to create a coherent whole.</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><br><blockquote type="cite"><br>I think this mainly applies to railways, however, as I've mentioned before, I'm trying out a few of the ideas on the UK's much smaller list of tram networks.<br> <br><a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Trams">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Trams</a> details where I've got to so far.<br><br>The Tramlink in Croydon (London) is a good example of where the the infrastructure (the track network) is clearly different from the tram service patterns (routes 1 to 3).<br> <br>The routes are currently mapped with a relation tagged as type=route, route=tram.<br><br>I've just created a relation for the network as a whole (see <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/189917">http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/189917</a>). For the type being, it's tagged as type=network, network=tram as well as public_transport=network from Sebastians proposal.<br> <br>Are there any other views on how this should be tagged? Perhaps the network shouldn't be tagged at all, under the "relations aren't for categories" principle?<br><br>I'm also of the opinion that we should stick to using type=route, route=tram/railway for the train/tram service patterns, rather than the infrastructure. However, this appears to be the opposite of what's written in <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Oxomoa/Public_transport_schema">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Oxomoa/Public_transport_schema</a> <br> <br>Thoughts?<br><br><br>Frankie<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Frankie Roberto <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:frankie@frankieroberto.com">frankie@frankieroberto.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_quote"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Jochen Topf <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jochen@remote.org" target="_blank">jochen@remote.org</a>></span> wrote:<br> <br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div> > The first question is what does route=railway denote, the infrastructure or<br> > the service pattern?<br> <br> </div>This has been solved in Sebastians proposal:<br> <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Oxomoa/Public_transport_schema#Differentiation_between_railway_lines_and_railway_routes" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Oxomoa/Public_transport_schema#Differentiation_between_railway_lines_and_railway_routes</a></blockquote> </div><div><br>Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen this. I agree with Peter that we need to bring these various proposals together, form some kind of consensus, and document it fully on the main wiki pages (eg <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routes" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routes</a>)<br> </div></div><br>Interestingly, if I understand it correctly, the division between "route" and "line" in Sebastian's proposal is exactly opposite to what I'd intuitively have guessed at from the words. eg, we have the "West Coast Main Line" (the infrastructure or rail corridor) and "the route of the Flying Scotsman" (the schedule service route). <br> <br>So if it was me, I think I'd name them the opposite way round. However, so long as we document them clearly (with examples), I guess it doesn't matter too much which words we use.<br><br>As a first step, I think it'd be useful to look at some concrete examples, see how they're currently tagged in OSM, and suggest ways in which the various schemes would be applied.<br> <br>I've started doing this a bit with the UK's tram networks (<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Trams" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Trams</a>), which so far use route=tram to tag the service patterns of the trams (which seem to sometimes be called lines, and sometimes routes).</div> </div></div></blockquote></div><br>-- <br>Frankie Roberto<br>Experience Designer, Rattle<br>0114 2706977<br><a href="http://www.rattlecentral.com">http://www.rattlecentral.com</a><br><br> _______________________________________________<br>Talk-transit mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org">Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org</a><br>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>