[Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism

[Michał Borsuk]

On 01/24/2011 11:06 AM, Frankie Roberto wrote:
>
> [...] I don't think you'd consider Embankment and
> Charing Cross stations to be part of the same stop area, even though
> they're very close to each other? On the other hand, some stop areas
> (Waterloo perhaps) may be huge, even though it may take you more ten
> minutes to get from one stop to another (even from one tube platform to
> another).

I don't exactly remember Charing Cross area, but I know where you're 
going with it. I actually see an advantage of OSM over traditional 
routing software. I have been sent by HAFAS (THE German routing 
application) from one bus stop to another very close one, but across a 
stream. The app simply calculates distances in a straight line. OSM, on 
the other hand, does have all the information: foot passages, bridges, etc.

Again, let's leave to the software what is relatively easily calculated.

And if a connection is too difficult (Charing Cross-Embankment above), 
it can be added to the connections cache. Such caches (static tables) 
are present in all major routing apps, so again, nothing new here. And 
much less work.


> I don't know whether this is intended from the current proposal or not,
> but I think you could construct a definition of stop areas along the
> lines of:
>
> "a collection of public transport stops, often of differing modes, which
> are often physically connected by short walkways, often sharing the same
> name, are advertised as being an interchange on public transport maps
> and diagrams, and may be treated as a valid interchange by fare structures."

I must disagree, see above.


Greetings,

LMB