[OSM-talk-be] Bus route operator OTW vs. TEC

[Francois Gerin]

Hi,

Please, keep in mind that:

  - this is a public/private company, with the usual mess, changes 
taking years, etc.

  - there are relations, and nodes. Two items, allowing for different 
approaches, which could be relevant because...

  - a relation can span across borders or entities (OSMDoudou's example 
ref 4), while nodes are very located in a single entity.

Also, sticking with the old stuff is exactly the problem with such a 
public company that takes years to evolve. They slow down every change 
because of excessive bureaucracy. I would suggest not to help the 
slowness, but favor the improvements, even if they take years.

On another hand, moving everything to the new OTW naming is 1) too soon 
(does not match the reality), and 2) risky since some political decision 
could change again the rules before the previous ones get applied 
everywhere.

This is the sad reality of bureaucracy, slowness, inefficiency, but also 
reality: that's not possible to change all the thousand documents and 
references every time a political/CEO decision is taken... Also, OSM is 
mapping "reality".

=> Even if on a technical ground I fully support coherency, thus 
harmonization throughout the whole data, here we could quickly face 
backlashes. Thus I would allow for both naming to exist, and managing 
this according to the "reality on the ground"... With flexible 
interpretation so as to match a best compromise. But, indeed, it's less 
nice on the data coherency "appearance". (However, it sticks to the 
principle "OSM maps reality".)

My 2 cents.

++
François



On 12/01/21 08:01, Jo wrote:
> I downloaded their data at http://opendata.tec-wl.be/ 
> <http://opendata.tec-wl.be/> and in both the GTFS and the BLTAC files 
> they still have separate files for each division and references to 
> stops prepended with a letter indicating what division it belongs to. 
> Contrary to De Lijn a single stop can have multiple such references. I 
> hope they will change this at some point.
>
> Jo
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:34 PM Jo <winfixit at gmail.com 
> <mailto:winfixit at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Actually those refs were never on the 'flags/paddles', I'll have a
>     look at their data, hopefully it's still available under a free
>     license.
>
>     Jo
>
>     On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 21:30 OSMDoudou
>     <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com
>     <mailto:19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com>> wrote:
>
>         Yes, my reading is that all local TEC names and companies have
>         merged into the commercial brand TEC owned by the OTW company.
>         Here is another article on the matter:
>
>         “
>
>         Ce que la réforme prévoit
>
>         1. L'intégration des différentes entités du Groupe TEC dans
>         une nouvelle entité juridique unique appelée Opérateur de
>         Transport de Wallonie (OTW). Toutefois, le TEC reste bien la
>         marque commerciale du Groupe.
>
>         “
>
>         (http://mobilite.wallonie.be/news/fusion-des-tec--la-reforme-est-adoptee
>         <http://mobilite.wallonie.be/news/fusion-des-tec--la-reforme-est-adoptee>)
>
>         Regarding your question, I didn’t verify visually on the road
>         signs, if that was your question.
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Talk-be mailing list
>         Talk-be at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-be at openstreetmap.org>
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20210112/8292f681/attachment-0001.htm>