[Talk-transit] Proposed Feature - 2nd RFC - Public Transport

Vincent Privat vincent.privat at gmail.com
Tue Jan 11 12:14:37 GMT 2011


2011/1/11 Michał Borsuk <michal.borsuk at gmail.com>

>  Am 11.01.2011 10:34, schrieb Claudius Henrichs:
>
>
> Arguments for relations in each direction:
> - easier to check correctness and completeness (simply select each
> direction's relation in JOSM)
> - easier to manage routes where the vehicle takes different routes and
> stops in each direction
>
> ...which is very rare in Europe.
>
>
I strongly disagree, it's a very common situation in my city (Toulouse,
France). And I don't think at all it's a local specifity.


>
> This has been proposed some time ago as a reply to oxomoa's messiness with
> data structures. So somebody suggested a bigger mess to make order in a
> smaller mess. Gib's ein Wort für "efficiency" in deutsche Sprache? Can
> nobody really see how much more complicated and time-consuming this is
> becoming? At the cost of what, gaining 5% in data structure clarity? For me
> the gain isn't really worth the time.
>
>
It's a possibility, not an obligation. The example you gave as overbloated
and "unneccessary complex" says explicitely "if required". And this kind of
complexity is needed in some cases. It's not because some points are
necessarely complicated the whole thing is a "mess".


> I strongly support this proposal which 90% reflect how I'm currently
> mapping in Europe and Asia.
>
> Think of new users.
>

I am a new user. And I'm waiting for this proposal acceptation, because the
current schema is far too simple, and far too basic, to properly modelize
the public transport network I'm using every day. A "new user" is not always
a user who cannot understand this schema.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/attachments/20110111/fd8583bf/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-transit mailing list