[Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Wed Oct 31 08:30:49 UTC 2018

It is generally a bad idea to store data twice in different places. Any
database expert will agree with that.
It's a simple question of data maintanance.
OSM is being suffocated with imports/insertion of data that are maintained
outside OSM, and hence needs regular re-import or manual update:
buildings, landuse, monumental trees, publc transport routes, whatever, and
now even time tables of public transpiort.
How on earth can we maintain all that stuff in a single data base with our
And as we cannot maintain our data copies in OSM, they will drift apart
from the originals from the moment they are imported/inserted. No
reasonable person would trust public transport timetables that are in OSM.

My five Eurocents.


On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 09:02, OSMDoudou <
19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com> wrote:

> As you don't provide more details, this statement reads as a personal
> preference and isn't helping in improving the proposal of enabling public
> transport routing. Can you make a more factual and informative explanation
> as to how it would be bad for OSM to contain timetable data? The proposal
> mentions a number of interesting use cases. Thx.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181031/1a153378/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list