+1 to all that, this looks good to me: type=route + route=bus + bus=minibus + network=* + operator=*
-- althio ps: splitting the discussion about sightseeing/tourist On 26 June 2017 at 06:39, John Willis <jo...@mac.com> wrote: > > >> On Jun 26, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote: >> >> It sounds to me like it is still a bus route. It may have a different >> "operator" > > +1 the minibus is still a bus. On 26 June 2017 at 00:06, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26-Jun-17 02:02 AM, Colin Smale wrote: > > On 2017-06-25 16:51, Michael Tsang wrote: > > Dear all, > > Is there a generally accepted way to tag minibus routes? What I mean is > that, > the routes are not part of the standard bus route network, operated with > fixed > routing, and use light vehicles (less than 20 passengers). > > I am tagging those routes currently with type=route route=minibus, but > somewhere else in the world the minibus routes are tagged with type=route > route=bus bus=minibus. > > Michael > > > It sounds to me like it is still a bus route. It may have a different > "operator" and be part of a different "network" and indeed use a different > type of vehicle, but it is still a subtype of bus so bus=minibus sounds > appropriate... > > > > +1 > > There is no restriction on the size of 'bus'. So I too would use route=bus > and then if I wanted bus=* to define the type of bus. > Some routes use several types of bus e.g. bendy, double_decker _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
