[Talk-transit] Naming concepts
gdt at lexort.com
Mon Oct 31 22:59:42 UTC 2016
Stephen Sprunk <stephen at sprunk.org> writes:
> I should point out that "bus lines", "cruise lines", "air lines",
> etc. are plural when talking about one company (e.g. American
> Airlines) because they operate a collection of individual lines
> between specific locations, such as New York-Los Angeles.
But one would say 'Holland America is a cruise line". So it's messy.
>> I'm still not 100% following. In the wiki table, is concept number 1
>> just a name for the collection of route variants, and basically the
>> name that the bus company (agency/whatever) uses? I would call that
>> "bus_route_name" then, with a name, and perhaps bus_route_ref for
>> just the numberish part, along with bus_route_operator. This is
>> making it like highway ref tags.
> Incidentally, this drives me nuts about transit. If the agencies
> actually published the names that way (e.g. variants 42A and 42B,
> perhaps with the shared portions just labeled 42), it'd make their
> services a lot easier to use; today, it's very easy to accidentally
> get on a "42 to Foo Street" when you actually needed a "42 to Bar
> Avenue". When "via"s get involved, it's even worse. Who came up with
> this nonsense and thought it was a good idea?
I agree, and the for the most part the agency near me (MBTA,
www.mbta.com) is good about this, having two route numbers for the two
ways the bus can run. But then they publish a "74/75" schedule that
shows information about 74 and 75 since they are mostly the same and
departures are interleaved. I don't think there's any way to totally
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 180 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Talk-transit