[talk-au] StreetToTransit connections mass edit
inas66+osm at gmail.com
Sat Apr 25 07:26:06 UTC 2015
I've noticed the same changeset, and most of it is nonsense, and isn't
based on the actual connections. It isn't that it does no harm, because it
introduces footway connections where none actually exist.
I think the concept is good for stations that are well developed. Like
some stations you can only access from one side, etc. So, I've slowly been
tidying some of them up.
However, I'd have no issue with a revert for those that remain unmodified
since the original changeset.
On 25 April 2015 at 15:58, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've noticed the changeset
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/14080990 where the user
> connected a bunch of highways/footways with the railway=station node
> and used the name "StreetToTransitConnection".
> I've asked the user about this in the changeset comment but I've had no
> First problem is, these are all named incorrectly as
> Secondly in some instances I've found the footway the user added was
> actually incorrect, went straight across the railway line where there
> was no footway in conflict with the existing footway network.
> In other cases the footway simply doesn't exist. I am curious if we
> need a footway to the actual station node? Normally you would have a
> footway to the platform and then that is enough, but maybe for routers
> we need a way to link the platfrom to a given station so that we don't
> need these incorrect footways linking them?
> Is a mass revert justified? Or do I need to go and do a mass removal
> of the "StreetToTransitConnection" name tag and fix up the ones I know
> about (which means there is no footway between the station node and
> the rest of the network)?
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au