Closed pietercolpaert closed 10 years ago
Maybe we can call it a hub.
Lets take an example : http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.60487714409828&lon=3.879992365837097&zoom=18 In here we have a typical hub :
all these things are connected and a junction can be made on all those kind of transportation «stops»
A hub could include exchange car parks (car to tramway or subway) classical car parks…
I think it would be best to define it as a "stop_area" and that a "stop_area" contains a lot of "stop_point"s. A "stop_point" does not necessarily have a "stop_area".
The semantics of "stop" is in my opinion perfect for a general vocabulary for both private and public transport.
I think the real question to be answered here is: "Do we need the distinction between public and private transport?"
stop area
is the term from transmodel http://sitp.transmodel.org/transmodel_v5_en/pages/7dd1b9c33a7e01e0.htm. I think it is not ambigous and easy to understand.
I found nothing in transmodel about private transport, maybe I just missed it : http://sitp.transmodel.org/transmodel_v5_en/pages/57ca47aa3d3500e4.htm
I have a very strong opinion against stop
as in transmodel it refers to a bus stopping at a stop point
. So it is extreamly ambigous.
And now to the rel real question ;) We can either:
point
or something similarstop point
+1 for @Tristramg 's comments. I prefer using stop_area
as well.
I would prefer to have a stop_point
to refer to anything, whether it is a parking lot, a drop off zone for rented bikes or a bus stop point. Then we should have a property for the types of transport the stop_point
supports.
For instance:
<this stop_point> <has_mode> <bus>,<tram>
for a stop_point
which serves buses and trams.
Now for another question: does a stop_point
belong to 1 agency only? And a stop_area
can contain a lot of stop_point
s from different agencies?
So let’s stick with stop_point
and stop_area
, and private transport can also use stop_point
.
It would be a pitty if gare du nord could only accept trains from SNCF and no one from Eurostar or Thalys ;)
A stop point
is not bound to any agency.
How would you handle private transportation? gare du nord
has_mode
taxi
? And we define different modes for bike rental, taxi, parking space or should we define an other relation? Might impact decisions on issue #3
@Tristramg
A stop_point
as I have understood now can be: a platform for trains, a platform for buses, a bicycle garage, a specific stop_point for a boat and so on.
So in your second paragraph, the idea would be:
<gare du nord platform 3> <has_mode> <eurostar train>, <thalys train>, <sncf train> .
Companies like Eurostar, Thalys, TER, etc can then just define their own vehicle type by extending the vehicle
class/word.
In your third paragraph, things would become:
<gare du nord> a <stop_area> .
<gare du nord> <has_stop_point> <taxi_stop 1> .
<taxi_stop 1> a <stop_point>.
<taxi_stop 1> <has_mode> <taxi>.
<taxi_stop 1> <maintained_by> <taxi_company 1>.
In more words: gare du nord is a stop_area
. It has a stop_point
called for instance taxi_stop 1
. This taxi_stop 1
has a mode called taxi.
Problem
At this moment we make the distinction between a public transport stop and a private transport stop. This is a problem because they need to be interoperable: a stop_area can contain a parking spot, a bicycle garage, and so forth.
Possible solution
Make a parent class called stop_point and stop_area which do not belong to a public or private transport ontology (but to the general open transport ontology). A parking spot can then inherit from stop_point, as can a railway platform or a bicycle garage.