[Talk-transit] New wiki article about network-relations: please review section about public transport

User 30303020 user_30303020 at e.mail.de
Wed Sep 12 18:44:17 UTC 2018

First of all, thank you for the review! I will try to address all the points mentioned by you.

Missing network definition: The article aims to define the term "network-relation" in the second paragraph from the top. "A network-relation groups features as members of a network, marks them as being part of a certain network and represents this network itself. A route-relation with the network=* tag is therefore not a network-relation. " This is not exactly what your problem says, but giving the definition for the term "network" itself seems to be redundant to the contents of a Wikipedia article. Or did you mean that you miss a criteria about which real networks qualify to be modelled as networks in Openstreetmap?
I admit that I did not thoroughly understand the tagging system of electricity networks. My intention was to present the broad usage of network-relations as presently existing in Openstreetmap. As far as I could judge, this form of tagging complied to the definition given above.

Contents of the page Key:network: This page only documents how the key "network" is used. There is a brief summary on the right hand column: "A system of routes (or bicycle rental stations) typically maintained or designated by a single agency or organization, or for bicycle and walking routes, an indication of the scope of the route." I agree that there are different uses of the key, but the wiki documents the mapping practices of Openstreetmap which are inconsistent.

Members of network-relations: I guess this depends on the type of network. In case of public transportation you would certainly use route-master relations if available and otherwise route relations. I added this information to the article. The disadvantages are mentioned already in the appropriate section of the article. The question if you can or should use super relations is up to the users. Please remember that this is not a proposal but a documentation of current practices. 

I hope I could clarify this and understood all of the questions correctly. 
Kind regards,

Am 10-Sep-2018 22:33:29 +0200 schrieb Stephen Sprunk: 

My main problem with this page is that it doesn't actually define the term "network", and the only mention that a network relation is one with "type=network" is buried down in the section on electric networks. It does mention route relations, but it doesn't explcitly call them out as being "type=route", which would have been a great place to put such a clear and useful distinction. 

The page for Key:network is also sadly lacking a clear definition of "network". There are a couple of references that seem to indicate it's a coherent numbering scheme (i.e. network denotes the namespace for the ref tag), which would be clear and useful at least for numbered routes and seems to be what is done in practice, but the section on public transit implies it might instead be for fare systems, which is entirely orthogonal. 

Also, it isn't clear what "features" should be members of a network relation. Routes? Route Masters? Stations? Platforms? Stop areas? If you include too many features, when the number of members grows to impractical levels, can you have a hierarchy--such as the "super"-relations used for long highway routes? 


On 2018-08-31 03:04, User 30303020 wrote: 
 Dear subscribers,
   quite recently a new wiki article about network-relations was created [1]. It features a section about network-relaitons in public transport mapping. Please review this section as there may be more approaches to this topic than mentioned in the article. Just to clarify the notion of a network-relation, I copied the definition here:   _A network-relation groups features as members of a network, marks them as being part of a certain network and represents this network itself. A route-relation with the network=* tag is therefore not a network-relation._    Thanks and kind regards
U30303020   ---- Link: [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:network   

Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-transit/attachments/20180912/5d26fe33/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-transit mailing list