[โ€“] 1 point 3 months ago*

@infeeeee

IMHO PTv1 is much more practical. If you see a bus or a bus stop on a road then you know you can add it to the relation and the whole route will gradually get completed over time.

With 'v2 you have to guess which of the (at least) two different relations you need to add it to unless you can get close enough to the stop to read the tiny text on the timetable (if it even has one), so you can't even do both sides of the road at once.

@openstreetmap @iuvi

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [โ€“] 2 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    @thomas
    You can create a dummy route in iD with just the start and endpoints and a single bit of way and then improve it from there with Relatify.

    I do find Relatify frustrating though. It only lets you save things that are perfect and unless you're copying from an official source you're unlikely to have every last detail at your fingertips.

    @openstreetmap @iuvi

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [โ€“] 20 points 11 months ago

    @pootriarch
    I generally consider it poor form to remove good data even if it isn't strictly necessary.

    The necessity of the addr:city tag depends on the area. In some places it's strictly according to a boundary that exists in OSM. In others the boundary data is either missing or doesn't always align with the "postal town" according to the mail carrier so it's good to include it.

    @openstreetmap

  • source
  • view more: next โ€บ