[Talk-transit] Uploading public transport data on OSM

Stephen Sprunk stephen at sprunk.org
Fri Jan 19 20:34:47 UTC 2018


AFAIK, GTFS feeds do not themselves have any sort of unique ID.  
However, as previously noted, it's a reasonably safe assumption that an 
agency_id will be unique across GTFS feeds within its geographical area. 
  I know that's not a guarantee, but I don't see what else we could do 
here given the source.

S


On 2018-01-19 04:40, Wiklund Johan wrote:
> But then how would an outsider know what the operator code or ID is,
> and where this operator+id is unique? If GTFS data is the source of
> your OSM stops, I would say a dataset reference is far more relevant
> than operators or network since the ID is unique in a GTFS dataset,
> but only in that dataset.
> 
> Overlapping datasets always cause problems of course, but only if they
> are not properly referenced.
> 
> 
> Johan Wiklund
> Data manager
> johan.wiklund at entur.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entur.org
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Davidson [mailto:theswavu at gmail.com]
> Sent: fredag 19. januar 2018 04.12
> To: talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Uploading public transport data on OSM
> 
> On 19/01/18 01:32, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Agreed; ref:gtfs just won't work, and ref:OPER probably would.
>> 
> 
> I had always thought that ref was the public facing reference that is
> used (ie: what's on the bus stop sign) and in the GTFS scheme this is
> stop_code. The stop_id is supposed to be unique and is not necessarily
> the same as stop_code. Looking at taginfo the most common way to tag
> stop_id seems to be gtfs_id.
> 
> So if there is more than one stop_id for a stop (ie: appears in more
> than one GTFS feed) I would have thought something like:
> 
> gtfs_id:OPERATOR=<something>
> 
> I have read elsewhere that some mappers prefer to use NETWORK, rather
> than OPERATOR, because their systems get put up for tender for
> operation on a regular basis so NETWORK is more persistent.
> 
> I was wondering if there are more than one stop_id is it worthwhile
> tagging something like this:
> 
> gtfs_id=A1;B1;C1
> gtfs_id:A=A1
> gtfs_id:B=B1
> gtfs_id:C=C1
> 
> So that the data consumers will find multiple values under gtfs_id and
> know to look for an operator or network value. Or is it better to
> leave it blank? I guess it would depend on whether or not you have put
> qualified gtfs_id's on everything or just the shared stops.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

-- 
Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov



More information about the Talk-transit mailing list