[Talk-transit] Proposed Feature - RFC - Public Transport

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Mon Dec 13 10:52:59 GMT 2010

I'm one of the people who would like to add data about Public Tranportation.
Since nobody likes to have to enter the same data several times, I can
understand the need for a 'definitive' way to map PT in such a way that all
downstream users (map rendereres, routers, etc) have the information they
need to work with. Apparently the system that you want to call established
does not completely cater for that, so people come up with improvements.

I like the proposal, the only thing I don't like about it is the massive
duplication of information in the route relations, which will make it harder
to maintain them in the long run. But I see why we would do it that way.
Maybe I'll come up with a proposal for 'proto-relations' made up of other
'routepart'-relations some time. Those could get converted to the massively
duplicated relations automatically then.



2010/12/13 Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com>

> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) <teddy at teddy.ch>
> wrote:
> > You both are right, "old" is the wrong word for what I wanted to say. I
> do
> > not want to replace or deprecate highway=bus_stop. Because English is not
> my
> > first language, I catched up to consult my dictionary and I think
> > "traditional" or "conventional" would be the better word, expressing what
> I
> > wanted to say.
> "established" would be a better term
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/attachments/20101213/06d1227e/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-transit mailing list