Proposal talk:Public transport schedules/Interval

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Route vs Route Master

This proposal does not clearly states if it applies to lines (route_master relations) or line variants (route relations).

I think, in the simplest cases, route_master should be enough, but anyway, it needs to be clarified in the proposal to avoid divergences among mappers and impossibility to create proper rendering or data reusing. Singing-Poppy (talk) 15:47, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I will specify that it should be on the individual routes if the two directions have different intervals and on the route master if both directions have the same interval. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Minutes instead of hh:mm?

  • In the original proposal for interval, the value was expressed in minutes not hh:mm. It's true that that is easier to work with when rendering. --Polyglot (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
    • I agree, I do not see the need to complicate --AgusQui (talk) 03:13, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Interesting. The hhːmm format allows for larger intervals (e.g. 24ː00) to be expressed more neatly, so in that way, it is better. Data processing is more difficult with this, unfortunately. I could add an option for just mm to the proposal. Of course, the voting has now already started, so this might not be OK. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

interval vs interval:conditional

Do I understand correctly interval and interval:conditional should not appear at the same time on a route relation? It that's the case, wouldn't it be better to always use the conditional opening_hours format and only have a single new interval tag? --Polyglot (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

The current system is good in that you don't need to use the ːconditional notation if you don't want to (or if the route is always the same interval). If someone is not familiar with the opening hours syntax, but still wants to add interval, they can just add the "main" interval with the tag interval. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Telescopic lines

For lines that have longer itineraries during the day and shorter variations during off hours, I was in the habit of only creating route relations for the longest variations to avoid duplication of effort in maintaining them. That's something that's not supported by this proposal and would be really hard to implement, unless additional route relations are created for the shorter variants. --Polyglot (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC) >

This proposal wouldn't interfere with that, though, would it? It would just add a little bit of additional information to the route / routes. This proposal is not meant to solve that issue. I think that that issue can be solved by moving towards GTFS instead as a way of storing routes. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Lines with several variations in itinerary

I'm sympathetic to the proposal, but while trying to implement it, I run into trouble.

The conditional interval, does the end time include when the bus arrives at its last stop? Or do we only consider the last time it leaves at its first stop?

maybe there should be a main stop for a line, from which we defined the begin time and the end time --Djakk (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
I think of this proposal as adding much more "rough" information about when buses arrive, if that makes sense. True arrival schedules are not meant to be added with the tag "interval". I would go with a stop somewhere in the middle, to answer your question, though. That way, the information is more accurate for all places along the route. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

When there are more itinerary variations, hence more route relations. Each of them will have their own intervals and for each stop, those will need to be added together to get the actual interval for that line at that stop at that time of day.

In my previous comment, I remarked that for telescopic lines, I'm only mapping the longer variants. There is already enough duplication. That doesn't work with this proposal. I think we could do with route relations that refer to other route relations for the set of ways to use. So route relations only composed of stops and a referral to another route relation that has this same sequence in its stops list. Or we start looking how we can create routes which consist of sub routes, where the sub routes only contain ways and the actual routes only contain stops + sub route relations. But that's for another proposal. --Polyglot (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• Yes for the sub route ! I was thinking the same :) Sub routes can also be shared between differents bus lines. --Djakk (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
• Sub routes are what GTFS does. The way GTFS works is that there is one big folder with a bunch of files that represent a public transport network. One file represents the stops (and includes each stop in the network and an id for the stop. Then, another file includes each bus route (route master in OSM) with info about ref, colour, and name. Another file exists with each trip in the entire network and the route the trips take (route relations in OSM, but with one for each departure). Finally, another file states the timetables for each "trip". That system works very well, and perhaps OSM will embrace it in the future.
• Actually I meant something else : line 1 takes streets A,B,C then D ; line 2 takes streets A,B -> we can define two sub routes, [A,B] and [C,D], the sub route [A,B] is shared by lines 1 and 2 --Djakk (talk) 10:48, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Another way to indicate interval variants

Hello ! I was thinking about an other way to indicate interval variants :

But when it comes with rush hours :

More complex example :

--Djakk (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

This proposal is not using the subkeys "rush_hour", "extreme", or any other, since those can be vague and differing based on different areas. This proposal is meant to be somewhat machine readable. --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes the subkey can be anything, but, it is still machine readable ;-) The program can look for opening_hours's subkeys then look for the corresponding interval's subkeys --Djakk (talk) 10:51, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Long intervals

How do we indicate routes with intervals of 1 per day or 2 per week, if they are included in the original proposal? --AgusQui (talk) 03:30, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Using something like "interval"="24ː00" for 1 per day or "interval"="84ː00" for twice per week (quite rough, but this works). --LeifRasmussen (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Same comment as above : can't we specify a unit ? interval=10 minutes ; interval=1 day ; interval=2 hours ; interval=0.5 week (the last means twice a week) --Djakk (talk) 10:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Irregular departure intervals

I don't see how this proposal can be used in the many cases where the departure interval of a line is not fixed. As an example, a bus line in my local area has the following departure times: 6.20, 7.40, 8.55, 10.25, 11.55, 12.55, 14.05, 14.28, 16.00, 16.55, 19.25 --TangoEast (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

The idea is not to put the exact frequency but the usual one, in your case I would put it every 1 hour and a half, but using 01:30 gives the impression of being something very exact.--AgusQui (talk) 04:49, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  • What about interval=11 per day ? Being unprecise. --Djakk (talk) 10:58, 24 December 2018 (UTC)