[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop

Selfish Seahorse selfishseahorse at gmail.com
Sun May 6 08:51:32 UTC 2018


Hi,

Like Martin, I think the public transport scheme should not be used
here, because a walking bus is neither a form of transport nor is it
really public.


On 6 May 2018 at 09:45, Lorenzo Stucchi <lorenzo.stucchi at mail.polimi.it> wrote:
> Hi,
> I’m sorry for the error that I made using the old Public Transport scheme,
> so according to what was proposed before I correct the page proposing the
> tag: walikingbus=yes to be used with public_transport=platform like was now
> proposed in the page
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Walkingbus_stop
>
> Thanks and sorry again for my mistake
> Hi,
> LorenzoStucchi
>
> Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 12:28:09 +1000
> From: <osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au>
> To: "'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools'"
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop
> Message-ID: <00ab01d3e4e1$e1575d50$a40617f0$@thorsten.engler.id.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Well, but based on your description, these are not planned routes in any
> way. They are purely transient emergent behaviour based on the fact that a
> lot of people want to move between these two points, and this is the obvious
> way to go.
>
> Take the people away, and the phenomenon disappears. This is not something
> that does not exist on its own.
>
> A bus route, a foot or hiking route, or a walking bus route on the other
> hand all exist even in the absence of people There are stops with signs,
> guiding signs, brochures showing the route... The route is planned and
> documented, and (at least till someone changes the planning) operate and
> exist even in the absence of people using them.
>
> The only thing that exist of what you describe is the environment that
> promotes this particular emergent behaviour, like the pedestrian zone sign,
> and these can and should obviously be mapped.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9035 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, 6 May 2018 00:59
> To: tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop
>
> Not really transient and some routes can be over 500m in length. For
> example, in Karşıyaka, more than 100 people/min/sq-m walks following
> Bahriye Üçok Boulevard (western sidewalk only) and Kemalpaşa Avenue
> (pedestrianised during the day and evening, pedestrian priority
> otherwise, marked by a pedestrian zone sign) between Karşıyaka
> Underground Car Parking and "Hergele Meydanı" (all comers' square).
>
>
> 05-05-2018 17:51 tarihinde osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au yazdı:
>
> If they are unmarked on the ground, are they documented somewhere?
>
> Or is it simply a case of "this is a common route a lot of people
>
> walk
>
> during certain times as there is a strong flow of people from A to
>
> B
>
> and this is the most commonly used route"? (In which case they
>
> aren't
>
> really something that exists as an entity of it's own and are only
>
> a
>
> transient event, though maybe a commonly reoccurring one.)
>
> In either case, it doesn't sound like a "walking bus" at all.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9035 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, 6 May 2018 00:09
> To: tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop
>
> No, foot tram routes are unmarked but you can easily join one by
> following the crowd. Normal foot routes have guiding signs.
>
>
> 05-05-2018 17:05 tarihinde osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au
>
> yazdı:
>
> Without a "driver", fixed "stops" and a defined schedule, that
>
> sounds more like what's currently already mapped using
>
> route=foot
>
> relations?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9035 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, 5 May 2018 23:28
> To: tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop
>
> We also have walking bus routes in Turkey but without drivers.
>
> We
>
> call them "tabanvay", foot tram. You can have very crowded
>
> walking
>
> bus routes in peak times, especially in pedestrian road
>
> networks.
>
>
>
> 05-05-2018 15:59 tarihinde osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au
>
> yazdı:
>
> If there are actual poles and stop signs, you can only “board”
>
> at
>
> these places and at specific times, and the “driver” stays
>
> with
>
> the
>
> group from the first to the last stop, then yeah, I can see
>
> this
>
> as
>
> being very different from a “school crossing guard” which
>
> generally
>
> stays at one specific crossing and controls the traffic there.
>
> And
>
> under these conditions, I think the term “platform” as it is
>
> used
>
> in
>
> PTv2 does apply to the position of the poles.
>
>
>
> *From:*Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, 5 May 2018 22:42
> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -
>
> Walkingbus_stop
>
>
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
> On 4. May 2018, at 22:34, Johnparis <okosm at johnfreed.com
> <mailto:okosm at johnfreed.com>> wrote:
>
>    Please DO follow Thorsten's suggestion and follow PTv2,
>
> mapping
>
>    the stops as nodes alongside the street/way (not on it) in
>
> the
>
>    proper direction. Tag each one:
>
>    walking_bus=yes
>
>    public_transport=platform
>
>
>
>
>
> is walking really a kind of “public transport”? Are we going
>
> to
>
> tag
>
> places as public transport platforms where people are waiting
>
> for
>
> someone else to accompany them for walking somewhere?
>
>
>
> To me “walking bus” seems just a new buzzword for a service
>
> that
>
> has
>
> been in existence for a long time (school crossing guards) and
>
> that
>
> was never considered public transport until someone proclaimed
>
> it
>
> could be seen as kind of “bus” but without a vehicle ;-)
>
>
>
> I don’t think it shouldn’t be tagged, but I don’t see it as
>
> public
>
> transport either, particularly I don’t believe we should use
>
> the
>
> term
>
> platform in context of this kind of service
>
>
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Tagging Digest, Vol 104, Issue 17
> ****************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



More information about the Tagging mailing list