Hi, habe diesen und den CS 81592068 komplett rückgängig gemacht. Evtl. muss du ein paar Punkte der Hausumrisse und so weiter nochmals anpassen ...

Toni

Servus,

Danke für die schnelle Antwort.

Ich sehe hier 2 Edits mit Kommenttar "Adresse geändert, Quelle: Bayernatlas" und zwei weitere mit (nur) "Adresse geändert".

Soll ich alle vier oder nur die ersten zwei rückgängig machen?

Gruß
Toni

Hallo citro,

der Bayernatlas ist als Quelle für OSM nicht geeignet. Die Lizenz läßt das nicht zu. Wir wurden vom Rechteinhaber (Freistaat Bayern) deswegen schonmal abgemahnt.

Könntest Du diesen Edit und u.U. ähnliche Edits) bitte rückgängig machen und auf den Bayernatlas als Quelle verzichten.

Vom Bayernatlas dürfen wir lediglich die "Bayern (DOP 80)" Luftbilder zum Abmalen verwenden - mehr geht leider nicht.

Viele Grüße
Toni

Auch Moin,

sieht gut aus. Beim Bus 206 (osm.org/relation/8894985) ist eine stop_area eingetragen.

Stop-Areas gehören zur sogenannten PTv2 (Public Transport Version 2), sind aber nicht Teil einer Route. Hier wären die beiden Elemente Stop-Position (+ bus=yes) und Platform (+ name=) jeweils einzeln am Anfang der Relation einzutragen (stop1, platform1, stop2, platform2, ... way1, way2, ...).
Zur Relation/Route dann noch ein public_transport:version=2, dann sollte das gut passen.

Die in OSM eingetragenen Linien des MDV werden täglich analysiert:

https://ptna.openstreetmap.de

Viele Grüße
Toni

PTv2:
osm.wiki/Public_transport

Servus,

... kennst Du schon?

https://jungle-bus.github.io/Busy-Hours/#/

https://github.com/Jungle-Bus/Busy-Hours

von französischen Kollegen (die für die FR-IDF bei PTNA beigetragen haben).

Damit kann man interval, interval:conditional und opening_hours (statt service_times) für Buslinien editieren (osm.wiki/Key:interval).

Nur so zur Info, habe selber mal damit rumgespielt, ist am Anfang nicht gerade intuitiv und kann in Arbeit ausarten.

Viele Grüße
Toni

Servus Eva,

ich sehe gerad, dass wir nun 4 nahezu identische Einträge für Föss, SHZ ...

Ich denke 3 davon können bzw. sollten wir löschen.

Soll dieser Punkt hier mit Namen "Föss e.V." stehen bleiben?

Viele Grüße
Toni

BTW: die Stadt München veranstaltet am 28. März was ...
https://barcamptools.eu/digital_engagiert_muc/events

Mapillary Fotos still show this being blocked in August 2019, so could be a long-lasting construction site or a permanent closing of the road?

https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/VYeHg0Zfgnnjzp8TVt3oLQ

Hello,

seems that the problem still happens.

The two new ways here at the bottom of the list (version 1) are not member of any relation. The old ones (v11 and v15) are members of many Flixbus routes.

Did you select (ctrl + a) the ways to be split before doing ctrl + alt + d ?

Yes, downloading only the ways with ref="A51" (or so) via overpass api seems to be the reason.

Using ctrl + a and ctrl + alt + d should avoid that.

Best regards
Toni

Yes, when dividing a way in iD or JOSM or ... one way remains as is (having the former ID) and a new one is created (hiving '0' as ID inside JOSM, getting a new ID during upload).
I would call this new one a sister/brother way and yes, it directly inherits all the tags (highway, maxspeed, ref, name, ...) assigned to the other one (thus being a clone until you start adding/deleting tags).

But there's more than that:

Have a look at this way:

osm.org/way/662951145

scroll down and you'll see that this one is part of many relations (called: parents).

One of them is osm.org/relation/136434 and another parent relation is osm.org/relation/92308#map=9/45.3953/8.9772

Both again are members of other parent (grand parents of the way) relations.

But this way is also member of many other relations which describe Flixbus routes.

So, let's say, if you download in JOSM
osm.org/relation/136434 (only the A51 relation): you'll get the A51 relation and all members of this relation - nothing else. At this point, JOSM does not download all the other parent relations of the way 'E 64', 'Flixbus 400',...

If you now divide a way into two pieces (e.g. 50% and 50%) JOSM knows that the new sister/brother way has to be part of the 'A51' relation and inserts this new way into that relation, at the right place, in the right sequence, next to it's sister/brother way (the old one).

As JOSM does not know anything about the other parent relations of that way, it cannot insert the new sister/brother way into those relations - those relations will have gaps afterwards. 50% of the old way are missing.

So, before dividing a way or many ways: select all relevant ways and type Ctrl+Alt+D which will download all parent relations and ways of of them.

Then you can safely start dividing ways and JOSM will take care for you about all relations.

Hope that helps. Kindly come back if you have more questions ...

Best regards
Toni

office=it hinzugefügt

Hi,

sorry for my relatively short message. I had prepared a longer one with more explanation and so on, but my browser crashed and I had to leave the office but wanted to write to you ... and ...
no reason to apologize.

Shit happens, and if you don't know this, you cannot avoid it.

I saw some of your other changeset comments: 'too long ways' isn't really a good reason to split - just keep them as they are. It'll make life easier for others, especially for maintainers of route relations.

Thanks for your support.

Best regards.
Toni

Hi Андрей Клопов,

please take care when dividing a way in JOSM.

Please also download the sounding areas of a way before you devide.

Otherwise we get a lot of gaps in bus relations because one piece of the split ways is not included into the relations - JOSM doesn't know about the relations, because you only downloaded the way itself and nothing else, no context of the way.

Thanks for taking care and best regards
Toni

See: https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/results/EU/EU-Flixbus-Analysis.html#A2.7

There's a lot to repair now ... :-(

Servus Andreas,

ich glaube das war das kurze Stück Schmiedgasse (der letzte 'way' unten in der Liste).

Viele Grüße,
Toni

Servus und willkommen auf der ÖPNV-Insel in OSM.

> Straßen, an denen Bushaltestellen liegen, für den Bus geöffnet

PTNA - "Public Transort Network Analysis" meldet u.A. auch solche Probleme - zumindest wenn dort eine OSM-Route lang geht.

https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/

Wobei highway = living_street streng genommen kein bus = yes benötigt.

Viele Grüße
Toni

P.S.: langfristig wird JOSM (josm.openstreetmap.de) als Java-OSM-Editor bei ÖPNV-Edits von Vorteil sein, da er mit (Bus-)Relationen/Routen besser umgehen kann und das Editieren derselben optimal unterstützt.

Hello Mac,

> (i) Would all bus stops be better placed at the top of the parent relation, i.e. before the nested route segments?

yes, stops are specific for routes, express busses for instance may skip 2 or 3 stops.

> (ii) Maybe there might be a need for separate train relations for each bus route It might transpire that the train segment will need to have the same ref/network tag as the parent relation.

Hmm, not sure about this. In a PM to Marco I sugested that PTv2 does not explicitely exclude member ways "railway=track" or ferries from route=bus relations.
Could we make use of this "inaccuracy" and keep one single route-relation per direction which "simply" includes highways as well as railways - thus being "lazy" mappers?
On the other side: How do OSRM, Graphopper, OsmAnd, ... handle ferries and shuttle transport when they calculate a route for a car? Can we "learn" from that?

Just my 2 cents.

Best regards,
Toni

Servus,

'add operator' war wohl irreführend. Ich habe den 'operator' vom route_master auf die route übertragen c&p.

Ansonsten wisst Ihr als lokale Mapper wohl besser als ich, wie es richtig sein sollte.

Könntest Du evtl. unter

https://ptna.openstreetmap.de

dann mal in die (tägliche) RMV-Auswertung schauen

https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/results/DE/HE/DE-HE-RMV-Analysis.html

Es gibt mehrere ref=5 Busse im Gebiet des RMV, wodurch man in den CSV-Daten unter

osm.wiki/Rhein-Main-Verkehrsverbund/Analyse/DE-HE-RMV-Linien

den 'operator' = letztes Feld angeben und natürlich konsistent halten muss mit der Relation - das können/sollten lokale Mapper mit Ortskenntnissen machen und up-to-date halten (Fahrplanwechsel im Dezember, ...).

Die CSV-Daten sind noch unvollständig und sollten das widerspiegelen, was der RMV tatsächlich anbietet. PTNA vergleicht das dann mit dem was es in OSM gibt - plus Fehleranalyse.

Viele Grüße
Toni

Hi Mac,

Marco pointed me to this discussion here, may I join?

Nested Relations as described on waymarkedtrails could be a solution, but this hierarchy is not covered by the PTv2 specification. Busses using ferries, shuttle transport and so might be seen as a gap in the specification though.

Another - not new approach to PTvX - is similar to the solution of Sarah (Lonvia). This introduces "segments", i.e. a bunch of roads (in a sequence) which are grouped by a segment relation. Segment relations can be members of route relations.
In dense areas, a segment would be a collection of 'ways' between two junctions (assuming busses join or leave the common route at those junctions).
But that's another story.

I have no solution yet to group

1.) London - Folkestone (bus relation)

2.) Folkestone - Calais (train relation)

3.) Calais - city-on-the continent (bus relation)

and backwards in one route(_master) AND at the same time specify that 1.)-2.)-3.) build an itinerary with a single fare/ticket and so on.

Best regards,
Toni

Danke Andy,

In der Gegend sind noch einige andere Mapper ÖPNV-OSM-mäßig "unterwegs". Evtl kümmern sie sich drum, schauen wir mal.

VG
Toni

Hi MacLondon,

I've noticed the changes for Fixbus 700 and others passing the tunnel below the Strait of Over.

I saw route="bus;train" and am not sure about this.

PTNA - Public Transport Network Analysis (https://ptna.openstreetma.de) carries out a daily analysis also for Flixbus in Europe.
PTNA complains about this, as route="bus;train" is currently not expected for ref='700' - see: osm.wiki/Europa/Transportation/Analyse/Flixbuslinien

The entry there could be changed to:

700;"bus;train";;Paris;London;FlixMobility GmbH

to cover the obvious things. But route= and route_master= of the route and route_master relations should match - from my point of view.

User "marcoSt" manages a lot on Flixbus routes (also for the US), I will also contact him on this topic . I will definitely not call this an "issue" though, but can we find a common understanding on this split route and how to map this?

Best regards
Toni