On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 11:21 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 08:02, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If I understand it correctly (quite possibly not) your examples are not >> GTFS feeds but timetables >> derived from them. >> > > Ugh, now you're asking questions that are way, way beyond me! Any > thoughts, anyone (& does it make any difference?) > Several of the links posted here were for human-readable timetables. They may have been created from GTFS data, but they're not raw GTFS data. They're what a typical user would want to see. But they're not directly usable by routers. A router would have to "screen scrape" the timetable and try to parse the data into a usable form. Each operator would need their own parser. The parser might have to be rewritten if the operator made even minor changes to the layout of the timetable. The GTFS data is in a standardized form designed for things like routers to understand. See this example: https://developers.google.com/transit/gtfs/examples/gtfs-feed - it's not something an average human will be able to use. I think we definitely need timetable=* for human-type data consumers. I think we probably also need gtfs=* for router type data consumers. Only problem with that is do we insist on the operator name even when >> there's only one operator? Probably best >> if we do. >> > > Do we need to? I guess it may depend on the individual bus stop - if > there's only one timetable, then just timetable=, if there's multiples then > timetable:translink=* + timetable:skybus=* +timetable:greyhound=*, each as > a separate tag going to a different URL. *Much* simpler than relations or > whatever, & I like simple! :-) > Yes, but many of the stops around here serve more than one route. And some of those routes have had (in the past) more than one operator and may do so again - council policy not to let a single operator have too large a slice of the pie occasionally meant two operators for one route. Of course, then there's the problem of ensuring mappers use a consistent >> name for an operator >> > > Probably get's down to local knowledge? I know that everything here is > covered by the Translink network, even though there are multiple companies > running buses on that network, with SkyBus running between the airport & > the major hotels. You know that you have Green Buses & Red Buses (or > perhaps Bysiau Coch? :-)) > Brodyr Richards. :) > in your area. Leave the naming to the mapper, as all we're really > interested in is the correct URL for that stop. > I was also thinking of the problem where "Green Bus" in Detroit is an entirely different entity from "Green Bus" in Kansas City. It is desirable to have both consistency and uniqueness. Which is why re-using identifiers by Translink, Traveline and other national public transportation organizations is probably a good idea (where possible) and one we should promote in the wiki entry when (if) we write it. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
