[Talk-transit] local_ref problem around Anerley in NAPTAN
peter.miller at itoworld.com
Wed Sep 2 12:52:50 BST 2009
On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:28, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2009, at 09:22, Peter Miller wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2009, at 23:49, Jason Cunningham wrote:
>>> I've noticed the same problem with Anerley. Digging around my
>>> memory and looking at the TFL website confirms what I thought the
>>> problem was. A few years ago a resting place/bus station was built
>>> next to Anerley Station for bus drivers, a couple of nearby Bus
>>> Routes were extended to Anerley Station, and other buses that
>>> finish nearby in Penge use it a a resting place. As a result was a
>>> change in the number and locations of Bus Stops, and their
>>> reference code thing.
>>> The result is available to see on the TFL website. If you look for
>>> the bus maps they have available for the Anerley area, they
>>> provide two relevant maps. The out of date Anerley map, and the
>>> new Anerley Station map [link]. And its far more complex than
>>> those maps show as bus stops off the main map areas are affected.
>>> Obviously I cant use these maps to sort the problem out because of
>>> copyright, but even if we were allowed to they wouldn't be of any
>>> Adding the Naptan imports to this problem has created a kind of
>>> OSM Soduku puzzle in Anerley. I tried to have look this afternoon
>>> but gave in fairly quickly
>> I have had a look at the area, and many of the merges of NaPTAN and
>> existing seem pretty straightforward where there are two stops
>> close to each other, one being NaPTAN the other not. Would it be
>> appropriate to merge the stops where there is no big issue first.
>> Most of the ones around here seem ok:-
>> I agree that the area around the station is more tricky given that
>> they have moved and renamed stops and will need a site visit.
>> Interesting that you found before and after maps on the TfL site as
> Pretty easy since I go past there each day. It's just a case of
> setting my mind to mapping on my own doorstep.
> I'm wondering if I should change the local_ref and not the
> naptan:Indicator, or if I should change both and then Naptan to take
> the new data as being better to update their records.
> I haven't seen any new maps on the bus stops yet, just the old ones,
> though I haven't looked at many yet.
There is a debate about what we should do when the text on the flag
does not match the values in common name and identifier fields in
NaPTAN (which will happen very frequently). Both are in use, one on
the journey planner and the other on the street. Individual bus
companies can also have their own names for the stops which could be
different again, and in extreme cases I have met a bus company where
the people designing the running schedules for the bus services know
the stop by a different name from that used for publicity purposes
within the same operator.
Roger Slevin and/or Peter Stoner may have some thoughts in this, but
personally the names still seem to be reasonably fluid currently but I
think NaPTAN will increasingly be used as the main source reference.
London is likely to be different because it doesn't like being told
what to do, but other parts of the UK may follow NaPTAN more clearly
There are still places where the current NaPTAN names is pretty
unclear and may be good for the authority to review them before
rolling the names out onto the street. In my town the they could make
better use of letters for local references.
Should we provide a standard way of capturing what is written on the
bus stop as distinct from what is used by NaPTAN?
>> Btw, I like the way you have done the platforms as linear ways
>> which the render nicely. I have just replicated that in Ipswich. I
>> did tweek Anerley station a bit to get the bottom of the steps to
>> join the platform btw, I assume that I was correct in my assumption.
> That was ages ago that I done that. I have added those extra details
> to a few stations, in some cases even adding the platform numbers.
> It does become more difficult when there are island platforms. The
> reason why I have been adding them is from a desire to know how to
> access the station, and how to access the platforms. It is also an
> increased detail thing.
I think that a good initial goal would be to create linear platforms
with references to allow platforms to be accessible by routing engines
(ie the platforms are connected up with footways, escalators and steps
etc to each other and to the entrances) would be a great goal.
Stations on multiple levels will be a bit more of a challenge -
possibly we start with surface and single level stations.
Fyi, where there are multiple platform references, ie 4 and also 4A,4B
and 4C I have stacked ways up, with a long way tagged '4' and 3
shorter ones on top tagged ref=4A, 'ref=4B' etc.
> It's great to hear that my mapping is spurring on others to map the
> same thing in their area. Thanks for fixing the bottom of the steps.
I am keen to get the article I have been preparing about interchanges
agreed and into the main wiki space soon. I played with using the
term 'Stop Place' and 'Interchange' for it, but the term Stop Area
seems to have been adopted now. Where possible it should describe
current practice, and only include new concepts where there isn't a
Could people look thought it and make comments either on this list or
on the page?
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-transit