[Talk-transit] JOSM Plugin
frankie at frankieroberto.com
Mon Aug 24 09:37:08 BST 2009
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Roland Olbricht <roland.olbricht at gmx.de>wrote:
> I would like to add to the map the bus routes of Wuppertal. After starting
> with a sample (4 out of about 50 routes), it turned out to be a tedious
> due to poor tool support. Thus, I'm thinking about writing a JOSM plugin to
> simplify editing.
Nice work on setting out to map the bus routes of Wuppertal (do you have a
link? I must confess I have no idea where that is).
I'm not sure whether it'd be more or less tedious to write a plugin for
JOSM, but good luck if you decide to have a go. Personally, I find the
online Potlatch editor works pretty well for tagging long distance routes
(and if you learn the keyboard shortcuts, it's pretty quick to keep adding
the same relation to a way).
> There doesn't seem to be consenus about what representation to use.
> There are some, partly contradictive, propositions
> (and probably others)
Yes - public transport mapping is still a fairly new activity, and so there
are a few different ways that people have conceived of doing it. I've been
trying to promote http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport as a
place where we can document the different tagging schemas in existence, but
documentation is still a little patchy. Please feel free to help out!
> - I'd like to differentiate between networks for different times of the
> For example, for the Paris bus network there are even distinct maps:
> The network has services that run only during daytime, services running
> in the evening, services running in the evening a different mission than
> during daytime and services running always the same mission.
Interesting! One idea might be to use a network=* tag. Alternatively, there
might be some form of hours-of-operation tag that we could either re-use or
propose. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport suggests using
service=*, but I don't think this is in wide-spread usage yet (or has even
The only thing we probably shouldn't do is to use another relation to group
the services together - as that'd be a form of categorisation, which isn't
what relations are designed for.
> - Some of the services run through loops. E.g.
> | |
> they run ABECD in one direction and DCFBECFBA in the other direction. The
> standard route model with unordered data does not allow to distinguish this
> from ABECFBECD forth and DCFBA back.
As I understand it, the ways SHOULD be order. Also, if we go with the notion
of using on-way 'stop points' (ie nodes in the highway representing where
the buses stop, rather than the nodes beside the highway representing where
passengers wait), then those nodes should be included within the relation
too, in order. (This is already done for some train services).
That said, I don't think one way or node can belong to the same relation
more than once! So you wouldn't be able to map the 'loop' perfectly yet.
- I'd like to give some indication about connections between different
> services. Some services always wait for each other to allow to change
> quickly. Some services intentionally have coordinated timetables, i.e.
> the busses of line 627 and 637 partly run in parallel. One is departing at
> stop at 00 und 20, the other at 40, so they offer together a ride every 20
I suspect that might be a little out-of-scope for a map...? Perhaps
concentrate on mapping the routes first?
Experience Designer, Rattle
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-transit