-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update also stop locations #7
Comments
Yup, I considered this for a while back in 2018. Those were my thoughts back then:
|
Did you have any success using
I am reading this as "don't redundantly store shapes which are covered by other shapes". |
The algorithm is still not perfect. Once ad-freiburg/pfaedle#7 is implemented, we can rely on {shapes,stop_times}.shape_dist_traveled.
The algorithm is still not perfect. Once ad-freiburg/pfaedle#7 is implemented, we should rely on {shapes,stop_times}.shape_dist_traveled.
The algorithm is still not perfect. Once ad-freiburg/pfaedle#7 is implemented, we should rely on {shapes,stop_times}.shape_dist_traveled.
The algorithm is still not perfect. Once ad-freiburg/pfaedle#7 is implemented, we should rely on {shapes,stop_times}.shape_dist_traveled.
Thank you for your work, the shape matching works really well.
It would be nice though, if the GTFS stop locations inside
stops.txt
were being filled or updated with the ones from OSM as well. For my specific use-case, I need to find the path between two stops from a GTFS file. This is hard if the stop locations don't line up with shape coordinates and some stop coordinates do not appear in the shapes (location differences between OSM and GTFS). So basically the other way around as GO_Sync does it.So when matching a trip to a route relation, not only save way elements but also the "stop"/"halt" nodes. Update
stops.txt
entries for stops inside the trip with the respective location of OSM stop nodes. Shortened trips that differ from the standard route as it is described in the OSM relation can maybe even be ignored, as they should be covered by the "default trip".What do you think of this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: