On 7/3/20 6:34 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
There's a star on the menu bar on top of the wiki page, just after "View history", where
you can "Add this page to your watchlist"
That's right. It will also be automatically added to your watchlist if
you edit the page, if you have the default setting
>There's a star on the menu bar on top of the wiki page, just after "View
>history", where you can "Add this page to your watchlist"
That's right. It will also be automatically added to your watchlist if
you edit the page, if you have the default settings for the wiki. This
may send you an email
Hi Stuart,
On 07/03/20 08:04, European Water Project wrote:
Dear All,
On Feb 4th, we significantly clarified the definition of
amenity=fountain after numerous discussions.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/050876.html
It seems the core of our changes were und
Dear All,
On Feb 4th, we significantly clarified the definition of amenity=fountain
after numerous discussions.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/050876.html
It seems the core of our changes were undone on Feb 26th
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag
I appreciate the proposal authors for helping to simplify mapping bus
routes.
I agree that in many cases it would be correct to only include the bus
stops or train platforms in the relation, especial for longer-distance
routes, where the bus or train might take several different routes
depending o
So, what about the idea to store the route in a separate route relation, then
add it as a optional member with role "route" to the PT relation? You will
have simplicity at the routing level and completeness at the route level,
without interference.
Without all the platforms, stops and waypoin
I think if people want to save the full route with way members, that should
be allowed.
If someone wants to do a first pass with just using waypoint nodes or just
the stop_positions, I think that's fine too.
So I'm against the proposal in the current form for this reason.
On 7/3/20 8:18 am, Paul Norman via Tagging wrote:
On 2020-03-06 9:22 a.m., Peter Elderson wrote:
That sounds even more odd to me... what if it doesn't match? Do we
have authoritative gpx-es for routers?
No. There is no one true route between two points, so there can't be
an authoritative r
As my personal biggest use of the public transportation relationship is to
visualize the ways that public transit route would take, I must say I am
personally against the idea.
>From my personal experience of using a non-OSM website "wikiroutes", which
is a website that let public enter public tran
On 2020-03-06 9:22 a.m., Peter Elderson wrote:
That sounds even more odd to me... what if it doesn't match? Do we
have authoritative gpx-es for routers?
No. There is no one true route between two points, so there can't be an
authoritative router.
_
It looks like it would save a lot of mapping work. While it avoids
some problems, such as the relation becoming invalid due to mapper
error, it may create new problems. Routers use different algorithms
and routing profiles, and the data that may affect route generation
(turn restrictions, speed lim
Mar 6, 2020, 15:22 by music.kash...@gmail.com:
>
> Thank you for sharing your thoughts 🙂
>
> 06-Mar-2020 17:40:23 Andrew Harvey :
>
>> I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for
>> downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route), could
>> this b
John Doe :
> 06-Mar-2020 20:39:30 Peter Elderson :
>
> > > [...] Is it a significant burden to include a router with a renderer?
> > I wouldn't know. It seems strange to me that established routes have to
> be re-routed to display or use them. How can you be sure the re-created
> route is the one
06-Mar-2020 20:39:30 Peter Elderson :
> > [...] Is it a significant burden to include a router with a renderer?
> I wouldn't know. It seems strange to me that established routes have to be
> re-routed to display or use them. How can you be sure the re-created route is
> the one that is defined
> Wouldn't that imply that a chart of PT lines in, say, a city, region or
country would need to route everything first, then render instead of just
render the route from OSM?
>
> Seems so. Is it a significant burden to include a router with a renderer?
>
I wouldn't know. It seems strange to me th
06-Mar-2020 18:08:22 Peter Elderson :
> If I understand this correctly, your proposal turns route relations into
> routing relations.
That's a clever way to put it 😄
> Wouldn't that imply that a chart of PT lines in, say, a city, region or
> country would need to route everything first, then
Thank you for sharing your thoughts 🙂
06-Mar-2020 17:40:23 Andrew Harvey :
> I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for
> downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route), could
> this be optional so you can create a public transport route relat
If I understand this correctly, your proposal turns route relations into
routing relations.
Wouldn't that imply that a chart of PT lines in, say, a city, region or
country would need to route everything first, then render instead of just
render the route from OSM?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 6 m
I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for
downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route),
could this be optional so you can create a public transport route relation
via waypoints only if you prefer as a starting point, but then still allow
it to b
Stereo and I have been working on a schema that makes it easier to create and
maintain public transport route relations. We would like to invite feedback,
questions, and suggestions, so it can mature and hopefully gain widespread use.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Simple
On 6/3/20 7:28 pm, Peter Elderson wrote:
To circle back to my question, I would not use something like
"detached" for a trail like The North Trail, because it still is one
trail and you would probably want to have the option to export it as a
whole, and to see the height profile (with gaps but
To circle back to my question, I would not use something like "detached"
for a trail like The North Trail, because it still is one trail and
you would probably want to have the option to export it as a whole, and to
see the height profile (with gaps but still useful) and total length
calculation. F
22 matches
Mail list logo
