[Tagging] public_transport=platform rendering on osm-carto
winfixit at gmail.com
Wed Jun 20 21:24:27 UTC 2018
It's probably best to provide a link to the actual route relation. It's
indeed a complex one.
Op wo 20 jun. 2018 om 23:11 schreef Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 7:43 PM, <osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au>
>> Everything you write is no different between PTv2 and the old tagging
>> FIRST, all the stops, in order. THEN, all the ways that make up the
>> route, in order.
>> As far as I’m aware, there hasn’t been a route tagging scheme before that
>> mixes the stops into the route before.
>> The actual PTv2 proposal documents that quite well:
> OK, at least that is clearer than the working pages of the wiki. But I'm
> still having difficulty comprehending one thing.
> I have an actual route, and I'll designate segments of ways with letters
> (and simplify it a lot). Platforms are mapped
> but stop positions aren't (somebody who thinks they shouldn't be there
> cleaned up after me).
> A B C D E F........ M N B C D E F
> Starts at A, terminates at F. It repeats B C D E F at the end of the
> route, but doesn't pass A. There's a stop at A (start
> of the route). There's a stop at C which is ignored the first time the bus
> passes it but is stopped at (on request) the
> second time (and appears in the timetable). It stops at F both times.
> So the stops are going to be the ones at A C F ... C F, in that order, in
> the relation.
> It's kinda hard for me to figure out what's going on from the relation,
> and I know the route. Without stop positions
> it seems to me to be a lot of work for a router to figure out as well. I
> think a typical consumer using the query tool
> would be completely baffled by the relation info returned. But you're
> telling me this is correct? If so, that's what
> I'll do.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging