[Talk-transit] Ideas for a simplified public transportation scheme
winfixit at gmail.com
Tue May 14 12:37:39 UTC 2019
For maintenance and for the stability of the data it is, however, better to
keep the object that represents the stop, the same during its lifetime,
instead of migrating it from node to way objects.
We are perfectly well capable of having a node to represent the stop with
highway=bus_stop and another object to represent the platform with
highway=platform or railway=platform or both.
For working with the data, it's enough to have the highway=bus_stop/
railway=tram_stop in the route relations and given that they are nodes,
their geometry doesn't need to be calculated over and over.
The thread is about simplifying the scheme. That is about as simple as it
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 1:29 PM Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 12:31, Dave F via Talk-transit
> <talk-transit at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > 1) highway=bus_stop is a physical object. In OSM we map physical
> > objects. To clarify - What do you mean by 'logical'?
> While stops (and stations, too) can be observed (PT vehicles stop
> there), they aren't physical objects. Physical objects are platforms,
> poles, shelters or road markings. They can usually be found at a stop
> or station, but don't have to.
> > 2) Why to they need to be "mapped on the same area"? They are separate
> > entities. Objects close to each other can be easily found as OSM is
> > geospatially aware.
> They don't need to be mapped on the same area, but it were easier
> (just one object). And if there is a real platform, it is the waiting
> area of the stop.
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-transit