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

Claudius Henrichs claudius.h at gmx.de
Fri Jan 14 09:25:39 GMT 2011


Am 14.01.2011 02:16, Tobias Knerr:
> Dominik Mahrer wrote:
>> One month ago I already posted an RFC on this proposal. In the meantime
>> I got plenty of comments and I have extended/corrected/rewritten nearly
>> the whole proposal.
> I'm not very happy with the extensive use of relations. Especially
> nested relations strongly suggest that the level of complexity is beyond
> what's appropriate for a crowd-sourced project like OSM.
>
> The most prominent issue are stop area groups. The necessity of these
> has already been questioned. I, too, tend to think that determining them
> algorithmically would ultimately be a better choice. Removing the nested
> relations for stop area groups would eliminate one of the most complex
> concepts from the proposal, making it more accessible to mappers.
>
> Additionally, I suggest to reconsider the requirement to use stop area
> relations even in simple cases Many bus stops are very straightforward:
> They consist of usually two platforms with a common name. This name is
> usually unique within a range of several kilometres and, if tagged to
> the platform elements, could therefore be used instead of a relation to
> identify the components of the stop area.
+1
I don't think the stop_area-relation for the vast majority of simple 
bus, tram or train stops is necessary. öpnvkarte.de and other sites 
working with the data prove that you can reliably determine nodes 
belonging to one stop via easy algorithms/preprocessing.

Claudius



More information about the Talk-transit mailing list