[Talk-transit] [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?
tom at acrewoods.net
Wed Mar 24 08:57:45 GMT 2010
That makes sense. So if a bus stop has one or more relations added, should
it be counted as equivalent to a route_ref tag in the colour scheme, i.e.
not marked as needing a route_ref tag?
You could also check if there are relations matching up to route_ref entries
for areas where they were put in.
On 24 March 2010 08:13, Shaun McDonald <shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk> wrote:
> The route ref is an interim data level until the relations are added. Think
> of it as house numbers being initially added as points, and then full
> building outlines being added at a later stage at which point the building
> number gets transferred to the building outline.
> On 24 Mar 2010, at 07:58, Tom Chance wrote:
> That all sounds good, though if we add stops to route relations do they
> really need route_ref?
> On Mar 23, 2010 10:26 PM, "Christoph Böhme" <christoph at b3e.net> wrote:
> Tom Chance <tom at acrewoods.net> schrieb:
> > On 23 March 2010 13:20, Christoph Boehme <christoph at b3e.net> wrote: > >
> > Well, I just updated t...
> Yes, exactly. My current plan is to have four types of stops in the
> basic scheme:
> 1. Non-NaPTAN stops: Stops without naptan:*-tags. Basically plain
> old OSM bus stops.
> 2. Unverified NaPTAN stops: Stops from the NaPTAN import which
> have a naptan:verified=no tag or which are missing the
> highway=bus_stop tag.
> 3. Verified NaPTAN stops: Stops tagged as hightway=bus_stop and with
> either no naptan:verified tag or a naptan:verified=yes tag.
> 4. CUS-stops: Stops with naptan:BusStopType=CUS because they are not
> marked on the ground and cannot be verified.
> Extended schemes would be:
> 1. Stops with notes: Highlight stops with a note or naptan:error tag
> 2. Route information: Highlight stops which are missing the route_ref
> 3. Shelter and asset refs: Highlight bus stops which have shelter=yes
> and no asset_ref or which have no shelter tag at all (this might be
> quite Birmingham specific).
> 4. Anything else?
> I suggest to keep the old schemes but rename them to the name of the
> public transport network they apply to (e.g. "Transport West Midlands"
> for Birmingham), since they are based on the amount of information that
> is available on the signs used by a particular network.
> > Best, > Tom > > -- > http://tom.acrewoods.net
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-transit