[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

John Doe music.kashish at gmail.com
Fri Mar 6 14:22:30 UTC 2020

Thank you for sharing your thoughts 🙂

06-Mar-2020 17:40:23 Andrew Harvey :

> I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route), could this be optional so you can create a public transport route relation via waypoints only if you prefer as a starting point, but then still allow it to be completed via the way members.
> A bit like how most things can be initially mapped as a node but then are usually expanded out into an area.

I'm afraid I'm against that idea, personally. I've mapped nearly 70 bus routes in my city (and counting); I'm still their lone maintainer; I have also dabbled with mapping railway routes. So many relations with so many ways - especially highways, which are the first things newbies edit and thus are the most likely to break a relation - are an enormous maintenance bomb waiting to go off. (And sometimes it does go off, and the fallout goes on for months.)

Besides - while I have never written a router or a renderer - I imagine that having to support both types of relations (PTv3 as well as v2) would create additional technical debt for routers and renderers.

> Secondly I don't quite understand the no way member rule of your proposal, since railways platforms should be a way https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=platform [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=platform] then including the platform in the relation means you need to include ways as relation members.

Thank you for pointing that out. The ways it referred to were highways and railways - it has, of course, no objection to platforms as ways or areas. I have reworded the section, hopefully it is clearer.

> On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 at 21:08, John Doe < music.kashish at gmail.com [mailto:music.kashish at gmail.com] > wrote:
> >
> > Stereo and I have been working on a schema that makes it easier to create and maintain public transport route relations. We would like to invite feedback, questions, and suggestions, so it can mature and hopefully gain widespread use.
> >
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simpler_public_transport_route_relations [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simpler_public_transport_route_relations]
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org [mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging]
> >

More information about the Tagging mailing list