6 messages in com.googlegroups.googletransitRe: Shapes - belongs to trip or route?
FromSent OnAttachments
Nick26 Apr 2007 03:19 
Devin Braun26 Apr 2007 07:34 
T Sobota26 Apr 2007 08:26 
T Sobota26 Apr 2007 08:42 
Devin Braun26 Apr 2007 08:57 
Devin Braun26 Apr 2007 09:56 
Subject:Re: Shapes - belongs to trip or route?
From:T Sobota (tsob@cityofmadison.com)
Date:04/26/2007 08:42:44 AM
List:com.googlegroups.googletransit

Devin-

Would you be able to answer the follow-up question:

Having differentiated between a route and the various patterns a given trip may follow along a route (variants, branches, start/end point thereon) - would it be acceptable to use a single shape definition for multiple trips (patterns), where the sole difference is start or end point? I believe the google map result will truncate linework that might exist in the shape definition before the actual boarding point of the itinerary, and subsequent to the actual alighting point. So if the shape definition used were the longest possible trip using common branches and variants, could subset trips using the same branches/ variants reference the same shape - so long as the sole difference was that they started a certain distance into that longest possible trip, and/or ended short of the final point defined in the shape?

Thanks

On Apr 26, 9:34 am, Devin Braun <devi@sdmts.com> wrote:

In a simple transit system where every trip follows the entire route, you could probably specify the shape of a route in the route file.

However, for most transit systems with shortlines, branches, and other route variants, you'd need to specify the shape of each individual trip so that the planner knows what shape to draw for that trip.

On Apr 26, 3:19 am, Nick <nalb@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm not sure why shapes belong to trip.txt and not route.txt - isn't this repeating a lot of information when each trip refers to a route (with a many-to-one relationship)?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -