[Tagging] Public transport routes with multiple reference numbers

Tijmen Stam mailinglists at iivq.net
Wed Aug 3 11:39:59 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?
>>
>
> No.
> 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.

You could choose to put them in one single route_master..

In RĂ©union, there are bus lines like 26 and 26a, where 26a has a different
last few stops. I put those in one route_master.

>>
>> 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
> ref=M215-M218
>
>>
>> 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.

Exactly. We have (had?) a common situation like here as well, but it was a
"triangle" I.E. you could remain seated from 36->38, then from 38->31 and
from 31->36. But different lines altogether.




More information about the Tagging mailing list