[Tagging] Public transport routes with multiple reference numbers

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Wed Aug 3 08:18:12 UTC 2016

I can only tell you how I would do it with the current scheme. If some day
in a very distant future we'll have routes built up from segments, there
might be a better way then.

2016-08-03 8:55 GMT+02:00 Michael Tsang <miklcct at gmail.com>:

> Dear all,
> How should I fill in the ref=* tag for public transport routes with
> multiple
> reference numbers, in each of the following cases?
> 1. There is a service identified by three different numbers, while in fact
> the
> three numbers belong to the same service with completely no differences.
> This
> is the case with minibus routes 52A/54A/56A in New Territories, where two
> operators jointly dispatch minibuses onto these routes, sometimes with
> number
> 52A, sometimes with 54A, and sometimes with 56A. However, they are
> identical
> services.
> Is using semicolon in the ref=* tag a good idea?

I would use 3 separate route relations. Annoyingly JOSM's validator will
probably complain about that. They are 3 different routes though and the
operator/network tags will be different between them.

> 2. There is a service identified by two different numbers, where the two
> numbers
> are always used simultaneously. This is the case with Shenzhen bus routes
> M215-M218, where both numbers are always displayed side-by-side in bus
> stops
> and on the number plates of the buses. They are almost never used
> individually.

Mark ref as it is marked on the buses and the stops, so probably

> 3. There is a service, due to operational reasons, identified by two
> different
> numbers. However, the two different numbers are used in different segment
> of the
> service, but in fact, they belongs to the same service (i.e. passengers can
> get a ticket and board the vehicle on the segment with the first number,
> and
> alight at the end of the segment with the second number without
> intermediate
> alighting or additional payment). This is the case with train route
> Z806/Z803
> from Zhaoqing to Kowloon, where the number Z806 is used on the segment from
> Zhaoqing to Guangzhou, and Z803 is used on the segment from Guangzhou to
> Kowloon (i.e. it can be treated as a through service).

I would use 2 separate routes here as well. I don't think we have a way to
indicate the happy coincidence that passengers can remain seated, but they
do behave like different routes.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160803/21fe128a/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list