“In cities that publish their GTFS timetables under free licenses which are kept current I don't see the point in duplicating this into OSM”
Sure! But how many GTFS feeds are there in the whole world, compared to the number of towns with public transit? I’m guessing that in Europe perhaps the majority of transit operators publish this info, but it’s not yet universal in they USA, and in Asia and Africa there are 10,000+ cities with no public transit info beyond what is available in OSM These cities rarely run strict timetables, but the interval (ie headway) between buses and “open_hours) (ie span of service) would be very useful and verifiable info. Joseph On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 7:19 AM Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 19:58, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > > also burdens OSM with dead data that will not be properly maintained. > > This is my experience too, I've seen people add bus routes from their > surveys into OSM but they quickly become out of date and aren't > maintained. > > Some roads can have 100+ bus routes passing through them, and then > when I need to change the road due to on the ground changes, I > suddenly get asked by JOSM do I keep this way in the relation or not, > and honestly I have no idea so the relation get's broken. > > In cities that publish their GTFS timetables under free licenses which > are kept current I don't see the point in duplicating this into OSM at > huge effort when I can't see any benefit. > > I do agree though there are cases like a small ferry route which > doesn't publish a GTFS but does have a strict schedule, which is much > simpler and could be added to OSM. > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
