[talk-ch] talk-ch Digest, Vol 856, Issue 1

Toggenburger Lukas Lukas.Toggenburger at htwchur.ch
Tue Aug 26 13:48:51 CEST 2014


Hallo

Ich nehme mal an, die Nachrichten dieser Mailing-Liste sollen komplett gestoppt werden? Falls ja, sollte das so gehen: Mail mit Subject

unsubscribe

schicken an:

talk-ch-request at openstreetmap.ch

Danach sollte nochmals eine Aufforderung zur Bestätigung kommen. Entweder gibt es da einen Link zu klicken, oder es muss nochmals ein Mail geschickt werden.

Gruss

Lukas

PS: Das Geschehen auf der Liste kann auch hier verfolgt werden: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/




________________________________________
From: talk-ch [talk-ch-bounces at openstreetmap.ch] on behalf of Walter Wiederkehr [wiediwiedi at wanadoo.fr]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 11:21 AM
To: talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
Subject: Re: [talk-ch] talk-ch Digest, Vol 856, Issue 1

Guten Tag,
Wie kann ich diese Benachrichtigungen abbestellen?

Mit freundlichen Grüssen
Walter Wiederkehr
wiediwiedi at wanadoo.fr





Am 26.08.2014 um 11:19 schrieb talk-ch-request at openstreetmap.ch:

> Send talk-ch mailing list submissions to
>       talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       talk-ch-request at openstreetmap.ch
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       talk-ch-owner at openstreetmap.ch
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of talk-ch digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: update public transport stops (Fr?d?ric Junod)
>   2. Re: update public transport stops (michael spreng)
>   3. Re: update public transport stops (Hubert)
>   4. Re: update public transport stops (Michael Spreng)
>   5. fahrplanfelder vs DIDOK (was: "update public transport
>      stops") (Stephan)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:37:11 +0200
> From: Fr?d?ric Junod <frederic.junod at gmail.com>
> To: "Openstreetmap Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra"
>       <talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch>
> Subject: Re: [talk-ch] update public transport stops
> Message-ID:
>       <CABx9_5HsTwBMg4woPeuaXz2qdm7AhecST7GMR2nL6YLxQ4ZARg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello,
>
> Should the source be updated as well?
>
> The value is:
>  "Bundesamt f?r Verkehr (BAV), DIDOK 2009"
> should I update it to:
>  "Bundesamt f?r Verkehr (BAV), DIDOK 2014" ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> fredj
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Spreng <
> mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> I imported the newest dataset of public transport stops from the BAV
>> (Bundesamt f?r Verkehr), known as DIDOK list, into our comparison tool
>> at didok.osm.ch
>>
>> I had a look at the stops where DIDOK and OSM disagree the most in
>> location (the stops where we have the largest distance between the OSM
>> coordinates and the DIDOK coordinates)
>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sw:9:46.903369:8.316650
>> And I made a few corrections to OSM data. Mostly there were issues with
>> OSM having a wrong uic_ref number attached to the stop.
>>
>> For a few stops it seems the DIDOK data has improved, and we still have
>> the old DIDOK data which was imported in 2009 and was a few kilometres
>> off. But it seems there is no big potential for automated edits, this is
>> best done manually. I have found some stops where the new location is at
>> least as questionable as the old one (example
>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 The new DIDOK coordinates
>> are on the SW end of the black line. But to me it looks like
>> "Ennetturgi" is rather on the NE end)
>>
>> Over all I think DIDOK has improved a bit, but there are still lots of
>> funny errors in it. For example here:
>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 they mixed up Gonten and
>> Gontenbad :) Too bad we couldn't motivate them to use OSM to check their
>> data.
>>
>> I will follow up with one or two other DIDOK related topics in the next
>> few weeks. In the mean time please keep using our public transport check
>> tool. There are still lots of unchecked bus stops
>> (http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 the red circles) which
>> are potentially totally wrong data from DIDOK.
>>
>> Have a nice week
>> Michael
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk-ch mailing list
>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/attachments/20140825/7eaa70f8/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:56:28 +0200
> From: michael spreng <mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net>
> To: Openstreetmap Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra
>       <talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch>
> Subject: Re: [talk-ch] update public transport stops
> Message-ID: <f6d2bd5ed597535207e398ff763cef3e at spreng.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi Fredj
>
> If you take information from DIDOK, yes please provide the source. This
> could make it easier for future editors to see what the state is.
>
> It should also be acceptable to remove the source tag and provide the
> source in the changeset as the source= tag
>
> Actually the year would already be 2015, as I imported the list for
> after the next time table change (which is due in December) I need to
> document this in a better way.
>
> Michael
>
> On 2014-08-25 14:37, Fr?d?ric Junod wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Should the source be updated as well?
>>
>> The value is:
>>  "Bundesamt f?r Verkehr (BAV), DIDOK 2009"
>> should I update it to:
>>  "Bundesamt f?r Verkehr (BAV), DIDOK 2014" ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> fredj
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Spreng <
>> mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I imported the newest dataset of public transport stops from the BAV
>>> (Bundesamt f?r Verkehr), known as DIDOK list, into our comparison tool
>>> at didok.osm.ch
>>>
>>> I had a look at the stops where DIDOK and OSM disagree the most in
>>> location (the stops where we have the largest distance between the OSM
>>> coordinates and the DIDOK coordinates)
>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sw:9:46.903369:8.316650
>>> And I made a few corrections to OSM data. Mostly there were issues
>>> with
>>> OSM having a wrong uic_ref number attached to the stop.
>>>
>>> For a few stops it seems the DIDOK data has improved, and we still
>>> have
>>> the old DIDOK data which was imported in 2009 and was a few kilometres
>>> off. But it seems there is no big potential for automated edits, this
>>> is
>>> best done manually. I have found some stops where the new location is
>>> at
>>> least as questionable as the old one (example
>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 The new DIDOK
>>> coordinates
>>> are on the SW end of the black line. But to me it looks like
>>> "Ennetturgi" is rather on the NE end)
>>>
>>> Over all I think DIDOK has improved a bit, but there are still lots of
>>> funny errors in it. For example here:
>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 they mixed up Gonten and
>>> Gontenbad :) Too bad we couldn't motivate them to use OSM to check
>>> their
>>> data.
>>>
>>> I will follow up with one or two other DIDOK related topics in the
>>> next
>>> few weeks. In the mean time please keep using our public transport
>>> check
>>> tool. There are still lots of unchecked bus stops
>>> (http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 the red circles) which
>>> are potentially totally wrong data from DIDOK.
>>>
>>> Have a nice week
>>> Michael
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk-ch mailing list
>>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk-ch mailing list
>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 20:27:26 +0200
> From: Hubert <h.ruettimann at gmx.ch>
> To: "Openstreetmap Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra"
>       <talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch>
> Subject: Re: [talk-ch] update public transport stops
> Message-ID:
>       <trinity-06f18d86-0d6e-4385-b968-c4f73696d08f-1408991245922 at 3capp-gmx-bs44>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/attachments/20140825/05059532/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 22:13:20 +0200
> From: Michael Spreng <mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net>
> To: talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
> Subject: Re: [talk-ch] update public transport stops
> Message-ID: <53FB98E0.8030708 at osm.datendelphin.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> On 25/08/14 10:26, Hidden Name wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Now, where we have the latest data, I would like to check and modify
>> all bus stops in my neighbourhood.
>> But I've 2 Questions:
>>
>> 1. How we handle the current naming: name="Poststrasse"
>> (Tagging-Scheme
>> like http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/EN:Switzerland/DIDOK) or
>> name="Uster, Poststrasse". Due to many bus stops with a name like the
>> second example, I don't know which one I should use.
>>
> The uic name seems to always contain the town for bus stops. Lacking any
> better guess we copied the uic name to the name= tag when we did the
> import. That explains why you see so many stops with such names. Simply
> no one touched the name yet. But When you check the stop, write to the
> name tag what you actually see on the sign post. Even if the town
> appears on the sign, but is written in a significantly smaller font
> size, we omit it from the name tag.
>> 2. Where I can tell errors in the DIDOK data. As an example I have a
>> case, that the bus stop was correctly imported from DIDOK 2009, but
>> now it hasn't a space between comma and second name anymore. That
>> would be an error in the current DIDOK data, but it's shown as "wrong
>> uic_name...".
>>
> There is a link for sending a message on this page:
> http://www.bav.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00475/01497/index.html
> I once wrote them about some particular errors and they were glad about
> the message. So you can try to send your error there, maybe they are
> interested.
>
> Have a lot of fun checking the bus stops :)
> Michael
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/attachments/20140825/8ce32789/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:19:03 +0200
> From: Stephan <mail at ping13.net>
> To: "Openstreetmap Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra"
>       <talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch>
> Subject: [talk-ch] fahrplanfelder vs DIDOK (was: "update public
>       transport       stops")
> Message-ID:
>       <CAG-Zn+0WXeynqaA=33OtPK8bSqw3EZDb9uS5Pidv=N+Xigi_iQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello all,
>
> Well, the "fahrplanfelder data" is updated every week and contains all
> recent change in public transport stops (that are reported by the
> transportation agencies). This is the raw dataset that is also used at
> fahrplan.sbb.ch.
> For example, if a stop is temporarily out of service due to construction
> work, this is reflected in the fahrplanfelder-dataset (or should be).
> Additionally, not all stops at DIDOK are actually in service, in
> fahrplanfelder they are (or should be).
>
> Regarding license: This license is especially written with respect to
> schedule data: I assume that BAV and SBB want to make sure that people and
> organizations always use the latest schedule data. For example, a mobile
> app offering the service should regularly update the data so it shows
> correct schedules to the customers of the transportation agency.
>
> Do we agree that the data and the update frequency is valuable (which I'm
> convinced of)? If so, it would be worth asking if the stop data alone can
> be released in a ODbL compatible license. What do you think?
>
> Cheers
> Stephan
>
>
> 2014-08-25 8:39 GMT+02:00 michael spreng <mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net>:
>
>> Hi Stephan
>>
>> I wonder: should they have different data than DIDOK? Looking at the
>> Impressum page the BAV is mentioned.
>>
>> It is a bewildering license. SBB (not BAV) may at any time come and check?
>> What? I agree with Andreas it is not compatible with ODbL.
>>
>> I regret that I can not make it to the opendata workshop about public
>> transport data.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> On 2014-08-25 08:07, Stephan wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all
>>>
>>> In my opinion, one could abandon DIDOK and import (and maintain) the stops
>>> from official Swiss schedule available at http://www.fahrplanfelder.ch/
>>> (Link "Fahrplandaten"). Since May, the data is published every week. The
>>> format for HAFAS [1], but the stops and their coordinates can easily be
>>> extracted from one file (BFKOORD resp BFKOORD_GEO). To automate the
>>> import,
>>> one could also consider the GTFS version, which is offered by the private
>>> company geOps based on the official data, http://gtfs.geops.ch/.
>>>
>>> One has to check the license agreement [2], though.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Stephan
>>>
>>> [1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAFAS
>>>
>>> [2] excerpt license agreement
>>> http://www.fahrplanfelder.ch/de/fahrplandaten/nutzungsrichtlinien/ :
>>>
>>> 3. Nutzung der ?berlassenen Rohdaten
>>>
>>> Der Datenbez?ger ist berechtigt, die ?berlassenen Rohdaten entsprechend
>>> Ziff.3 dieser Lizenzvereinbarung zu verwenden. Der Bez?ger ist berechtigt,
>>> die Rohdaten zu veredeln und in geeigneter Form zu publizieren. Der
>>> Bez?ger
>>> verpflichtet sich die Rohdaten mindestens monatlich zu aktualisieren um
>>> eine aktuelle Fahrplanpublikation zu garantieren. Die gelieferten Rohdaten
>>> d?rfen inhaltlich nicht ver?ndert, verf?lscht oder gel?scht werden. Eine
>>> Anreicherung der Fahrplaninformationen ist in dem Sinn gestattet, dass
>>> weitere Datens?tze (Bsp. Belegungszahlen, etc.) zu den bestehenden
>>> Echtzeitdaten hinzugef?gt werden d?rfen. Eine kommerzielle Verwendung der
>>> Daten aus der Kundeninformationsplattform ist nicht gestattet. F?r
>>> angereicherte Daten (Mehrwertangebote) ist eine Abgabe gegen Entgelt
>>> gestattet.
>>>
>>> 4. Pflichten der Bez?ger
>>>
>>> Der Bez?ger verpflichtet sich, alle nach dem jeweils neusten Stand der
>>> Technik m?glichen Vorkehren zu treffen, um eine unbefugte Verwendung der
>>> Rohdaten durch Dritte zu verhindern. Der Kunde verpflichtet sich, der SBB
>>> AG den Verwendungszweck der ?berlassenen Rohdaten bei R?ckfrage bekannt zu
>>> geben. Die SBB AG ist berechtigt, die Einhaltung des Nutzungsrechtes
>>> jederzeit vor Ort selber zu ?berpr?fen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-08-24 21:38 GMT+02:00 Michael Spreng <mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.
>>> net>
>>> :
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>>
>>>> I imported the newest dataset of public transport stops from the BAV
>>>> (Bundesamt f?r Verkehr), known as DIDOK list, into our comparison tool
>>>> at didok.osm.ch
>>>>
>>>> I had a look at the stops where DIDOK and OSM disagree the most in
>>>> location (the stops where we have the largest distance between the OSM
>>>> coordinates and the DIDOK coordinates)
>>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sw:9:46.903369:8.316650
>>>> And I made a few corrections to OSM data. Mostly there were issues with
>>>> OSM having a wrong uic_ref number attached to the stop.
>>>>
>>>> For a few stops it seems the DIDOK data has improved, and we still have
>>>> the old DIDOK data which was imported in 2009 and was a few kilometres
>>>> off. But it seems there is no big potential for automated edits, this is
>>>> best done manually. I have found some stops where the new location is at
>>>> least as questionable as the old one (example
>>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 The new DIDOK coordinates
>>>> are on the SW end of the black line. But to me it looks like
>>>> "Ennetturgi" is rather on the NE end)
>>>>
>>>> Over all I think DIDOK has improved a bit, but there are still lots of
>>>> funny errors in it. For example here:
>>>> http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 they mixed up Gonten and
>>>> Gontenbad :) Too bad we couldn't motivate them to use OSM to check their
>>>> data.
>>>>
>>>> I will follow up with one or two other DIDOK related topics in the next
>>>> few weeks. In the mean time please keep using our public transport check
>>>> tool. There are still lots of unchecked bus stops
>>>> (http://didok.osm.ch/#sc:14:47.491631:8.254766 the red circles) which
>>>> are potentially totally wrong data from DIDOK.
>>>>
>>>> Have a nice week
>>>> Michael
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> talk-ch mailing list
>>>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk-ch mailing list
>>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk-ch mailing list
>> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/attachments/20140826/10e78286/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of talk-ch Digest, Vol 856, Issue 1
> ***************************************

_______________________________________________
talk-ch mailing list
talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch



More information about the talk-ch mailing list