[Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 9 13:27:31 UTC 2018


On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 11:21 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 08:02, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If I understand it correctly (quite possibly not) your examples are not
>> GTFS feeds but timetables
>> derived from them.
>>
>
> Ugh, now you're asking questions that are way, way beyond me! Any
> thoughts, anyone (& does it make any difference?)
>

Several of the links posted here were for human-readable timetables.  They
may have been
created from GTFS data, but they're not raw GTFS data.  They're what a
typical user would
want to see.  But they're not directly usable by routers.  A router would
have to "screen scrape" the
timetable and try to parse the data into a usable form.  Each operator
would need their own
parser.  The parser might have to be rewritten if the operator made even
minor changes to the
layout of the timetable.

The GTFS data is in a standardized form designed for things like routers to
understand.  See
this example: https://developers.google.com/transit/gtfs/examples/gtfs-feed
- it's not something
an average human will be able to use.

I think we definitely need timetable=* for human-type data consumers.  I
think we probably also need
gtfs=* for router type data consumers.

Only problem with that is do we insist on the operator name even when
>> there's only one operator?  Probably best
>> if we do.
>>
>
> Do we need to? I guess it may depend on the individual bus stop - if
> there's only one timetable, then just timetable=, if there's multiples then
> timetable:translink=* + timetable:skybus=* +timetable:greyhound=*, each as
> a separate tag going to a different URL. *Much* simpler than relations or
> whatever, & I like simple! :-)
>

Yes, but many of the stops around here serve more than one route.  And some
of those routes
have had (in the past) more than one operator and may do so again - council
policy not to let a
single operator have too large a slice of the pie occasionally meant two
operators for one route.

Of course, then there's the problem of ensuring mappers use a consistent
>> name for an operator
>>
>
> Probably get's down to local knowledge? I know that everything here is
> covered by the Translink network, even though there are multiple companies
> running buses on that network, with SkyBus running between the airport &
> the major hotels. You know that you have Green Buses & Red Buses (or
> perhaps Bysiau Coch? :-))
>

Brodyr Richards. :)


>  in your area. Leave the naming to the mapper, as all we're really
> interested in is the correct URL for that stop.
>

I was also thinking of the problem where "Green Bus" in Detroit is an
entirely different entity from
"Green Bus" in Kansas City.  It is desirable to have both consistency and
uniqueness.  Which is
why re-using identifiers by Translink, Traveline and other national public
transportation organizations
is probably a good idea (where possible) and one we should promote in the
wiki entry when (if) we
write it.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181109/ec67983a/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list