[Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors

[David Woolley]

On 05/10/14 11:27, Spike wrote:
> On 05/10/2014 10:47, David Woolley wrote:
>> A classic example is NaPTAN stop data, where the rule for one that has
>> gone away is to invalidate the bus stop tag and add
>> physically_present=no, but leave the node present.  I think I've seen
>> cases where a stop being moved has triggered an delete/add operation
>> that has lost he NaPTAN tagging.
>
> Could I ask please the logic behind retaining references to a stop that
> does not exist?
>
> I have a local example of a stop that has not had a physical presence in
> living memory but STILL shows on bus company maps.
>

I didn't set the rules, but I believe it is because the data is 
imported, so the existence of the data is controlled by the source of 
the import.

Whilst the object still exists, it no longer has the the 
highway=bus_stop tag, so is not considered to be a bus stop, and should 
be deleted from any routes that it is on (very few people actually map 
stops on routes in the first place).

There are also some stops that are actual stops, but are not signed 
(customary stops), and amongst those, you will probably find a few that 
are only used for rail replacement services, so would have to be 
surveyed on the right weekend to actually be found (they may have 
temporary signs on those days).

(There is a problem with NaPTAN, that has been discussed before, than 
the NaPTAN list is dynamic, but OSM only has a single snapshot of it.)

In practice, I think I have found more NaPTAN nodes deleted in error 
than ones that represent stops that are never used.

You will find other regional imports with special rules, and they tend 
to be the sort of things that get erroneously repaired by people working 
outside the area.