[Talk-transit] Town names in bus stop names

Michał Borsuk michal.borsuk at gmail.com
Tue Dec 21 08:19:12 GMT 2010

On 21 December 2010 02:23, <michael at vonglasow.com> wrote:

> Hello list,
> While mapping bus (and other) routes all over Europe, I have frequently
> encountered bus lines linking two (or more) towns, with multiple stops in
> each town. For example, a bus route might include the following stops (free
> adaptation of commonly encountered situation):
> Greenmond, Station
> Greenmond, Doe Square
> Greenmond, Church
> Greenmond, Roe Street
> Greenmond, New Market Mall
> Whitepool, Primary School
> Whitepool, Church
> What should we put in the name= tags for these stops? Where should we best
> put the name of the town?
> To complicate matters, let us look at the following conditions:
> - The name on the pole itself does not include the name on the town. So the
> pole at the station in Greenmond would just read "Station".

I take the name from the pole, unless it's not descriptive enought, then
from the timetable. Here I'd clearly take "Greenmond, Station" (or
"Greenmond Station", but preferably not "Station, Greenmond")

> - There is also a bus line operating only within Greenmond, which shares
> some of the above stops. However, timetables and line sketches for this
> second line omit the town name in the bus stops (i.e. Station, Doe Square,
> New Market Mall).

In such cases I'd still use town name. It has happened to me that I wondered
out of nowhere to find a bus stop without a locality name.

I do it this way: only large towns and cities (let's say over 15 thousand
inhabitants, or with a sensible number of bus stops) have those stops
*without* locality name.

- When rendered on a map, it is also advisable to omit the town name - thus
> names are shorter, the map is less cluttered and the town name can usually
> be derived from the on the map.

Cf. the earlier point - if the town is small, the map is not cluttered.
Besides, rendering is not much of our concern.

> - Line sketches and timetables for the above line list stop names along
> with the towns they are in. There are different ways of dong this:[...]
> Or (since Greenmond is a big city of a million residents or more), town
> names are given only for stops outside of Greenmond.

I'd keep that.

> However, the more I think about it, the more correct it seems to me to put
> the town name in a separate tag.

IMHO No. This is a map, and it's the bus stop's location which tells where
the bus stop is. It does contradict what I wrote earlier - why then use town
names at all? Because some suburbs overlap in a strange way, and with
smaller places it isn't always clear.

> That way renderers get the actual (local) name of the stop separately from
> the town it is in and can decide how to process these:

But it's more complicated, and not compatible with existing software, I am
specifically speaking about a JOSM plugin.

> Michael

Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia,

Michał Borsuk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/attachments/20101221/526b4a62/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-transit mailing list