[HN Gopher] Large-Scale Generation of Transit Maps from OpenStre...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Large-Scale Generation of Transit Maps from OpenStreetMap Data
        
       Author : chippy
       Score  : 240 points
       Date   : 2024-09-09 14:08 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tandfonline.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tandfonline.com)
        
       | alvarlagerlof wrote:
       | This work is so impressive
        
       | openrisk wrote:
       | Amazing stuff at so many levels.
       | 
       | Would live to hear more about the motivation for using RDF/SPARQL
       | in the technology stack as these are frequently seen as arcane
       | and here is a very intuitive use case.
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | If you can get the math right you can frequently develop a very
         | good system for representing data in RDF and writing SPARQL
         | queries against it. A week of high-quality thinking can save
         | you six months of time developing an alternate query system;
         | the custom query system _might_ be better but it probably won
         | 't be. It's easy to make something that is faster for
         | specialized queries but unlikely you can build something that
         | will let you write complex and versatile queries better than
         | SPARQL.
         | 
         | The key though is coining good identifiers, developing a good
         | set of properties, and understanding how datatype properties
         | work and using them well. It's very easy to develop a bad
         | standard like Dublin Core that, unfortunately, perpetuates the
         | bad stereotypes people have of the RDF world.
         | 
         | The SPARQL spec is dense reading
         | 
         | https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql12-query/
         | 
         | but it's a tiny spec. The SQL spec on the other hand is broken
         | up into numerous $200 documents and if you did look at them
         | you'd find it's much much messier. If you felt SPARQL needed
         | something extra it's a good base to work from to develop some
         | kind of SPARQL++ and the same is true with the RDF model. (e.g.
         | add something to every triple to record provenance, for
         | instance)
         | 
         | My two complaints with SPARQL are: (1) there are two official
         | ways to represent ordered collections and a third unofficial
         | one; if you are good at SPARQL you can write queries that can
         | do the obvious things you want to do with ordered collections
         | (like you'd see in JSON query languages like N1QL or AQL) but
         | there ought to be built in functions that just do it, (2) you
         | can write path queries like                  ?s
         | (ex:motherOf|ex:fatherOf)+ ?o .
         | 
         | which will match ?o being an ancestor of ?s. Sometimes you need
         | to capture the matching path and SPARQL as it is doesn't
         | provide a way to do that.
        
           | spothedog1 wrote:
           | Can you explain why you think Dublin Core is a bad standard?
        
       | epsiro wrote:
       | Online demo: https://loom.cs.uni-freiburg.de/global
        
         | tda wrote:
         | Really cool! Very impressed by the results thus far, but
         | thrlere is also some room for improvement. Probably caused in
         | parts by parsing, and in part by input data quality.
         | 
         | - Taiwan has an insane rail network of a few hundred lines -
         | half of the streamlines in Amsterdam are tram 7, apparently it
         | takes you everywhere. - there seems to be an assumption all
         | lines stop on all stations they pass - quite a few regional
         | Train lines are committed in the Netherlands
         | 
         | And finally I woul love a bus version too!
         | 
         | Keep up the good work
        
         | cabalamat wrote:
         | This includes some railways but not others. For example the
         | Edinburgh tram is missing.
        
           | globular-toast wrote:
           | The whole East Coast Mainline is missing!
        
         | Doctor_Fegg wrote:
         | And the code: https://github.com/ad-freiburg/loom
        
           | eb0la wrote:
           | Thanks for pointing out in the paper that lot of Spain and
           | Italy is untagged !!
           | 
           | It's interesting to see the first high-speed train line in
           | spain (Madrid-Seville) doesn't appear. I'll see if I can fix
           | that.
        
         | zwirbl wrote:
         | Really cool, but what is happening in Taiwan in the long
         | distance rail map?
        
       | qwertox wrote:
       | Download link for the PDF:
       | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00087041.2024.23...
       | 
       | Such a great piece of work, very interesting.
        
       | remus wrote:
       | What's novel/interesting about this? Speaking as an ignorant
       | outsider, it seems like they're 'just' querying existing data and
       | plotting it. Obviously this is a gross simplification, but I'd be
       | really interested to hear what's hard about this problem.
        
         | mattlutze wrote:
         | From the introduction,                 Since the days of Harry
         | Beck, transit maps have mostly been created manually by
         | professional map designers (Garland Citation1994; Wu et al.
         | Citation2020). The primary focus was on static maps, either
         | distributed in print or electronically. These maps are
         | typically schematic, and the classic octilinear design (network
         | segment orientations are multiples of 45[?]) is still
         | prevalent. In the late 1990s, the graph drawing community
         | started to investigate the problem of drawing such maps
         | automatically. The following questions were investigated: (1)
         | How can graphs be drawn in an octilinear fashion? (2) Which
         | hard criteria should a transit map fulfil? (3) Which soft
         | criteria should be optimized? Several methods have since been
         | proposed (see below). A set of soft and hard criteria, first
         | described by Nollenburg (Citation2005), has since been
         | generally accepted. The important sub-problem of finding an
         | optimal line ordering of lines travelling through network
         | segments has also been identified very early by Benkert et al.
         | (Citation2006).
         | 
         | It not trivial to automatically generate an optimally
         | understandable octalinear transit map, and this group have
         | combined bits of 30 years of research to do it in one go for
         | every* bit of public transit on the planet.
         | 
         | * _every bit that 's in OSM, I suppose_
        
           | mistrial9 wrote:
           | ok yes BUT .. a reason that transit maps were carefully
           | composed is because people "who probably need assistance when
           | using transit" plus "people who do not speak this human
           | language" plus "people who depend on completeness and
           | accuracy to a high degree" are all, at the same time, using
           | one and only one map.
           | 
           | hurrah for computer science BUT this is also graphic design,
           | with human factors, and simultaneously authoritative data
           | that does matter to many real people. Easy tag-on criticism
           | is "who needs all transit maps worldwide at all times" ?
           | Isn't it obviously more important to have reliable, accurate,
           | readable maps for the people who are using the system heavily
           | in that area, instead of stretching all of those qualities to
           | get a toy-prize for armchair readers and the world cloud
           | servers on the Internet? common sense plays a role in the
           | guaging accolades here IMHO
        
       | bigfudge wrote:
       | This is really cool, but I wonder why the UK rail (commuter or
       | long distance) network isn't shown very completely. There are
       | _lots_ more trains around Birmingham or up north that don't get
       | displayed. Even the network in the SE is very partial. Is this
       | data really not in OSM?
        
         | hobofan wrote:
         | They discuss in the paper that those routes are less trivial to
         | query. For that reason, and I guess to mimic the traditional
         | local transit maps the online version only queries routes with
         | the `route` key `light_rail`, `tram` or `subway`.
        
       | widdershins wrote:
       | This is really cool. I'm fairly impressed with the maps of the
       | London underground, although there are some oddities in
       | Octilinear mode. It's also missing quite a few Overground
       | services.
       | 
       | It's really nice to be able to switch seamlessly between a
       | Geographic, Octilinear and Geo-Octilinear view of the maps,
       | because each of them tells you something useful. I would use this
       | if TFL added it to their maps app.
       | 
       | https://loom.cs.uni-freiburg.de/global#subway-lightrail/octi...
        
       | trains39472 wrote:
       | It seems like it's missing most of Tokyo?
       | 
       | Granted, Tokyo has a blended commuter / subway through-service
       | system (eg, Fukutoshin-line trains continue into the Toyoko-
       | line), but those trains don't seem to show up in either Rail or
       | Subway views.
        
         | shiroiushi wrote:
         | It is missing most of Tokyo. All they did is look at the
         | subways, specifically the Tokyo Metro system, and maybe a few
         | other lines. The JR rail lines aren't on there, and no transit
         | map of Tokyo is complete without those. The Yamanote line, in
         | particular, is a crucial piece of Tokyo's transit
         | infrastructure, and it's perfectly normal for people to transit
         | between the underground Tokyo Metro and above-ground JR East
         | lines.
         | 
         | Most likely, they just left out the JR Rail and other lines
         | because the map is way too complicated with them, or perhaps it
         | broke their algorithm.
         | 
         | They also didn't show the entire Tokyo metro area, which is
         | much larger than this and includes Yokohama. It's
         | understandable, though: the entire Tokyo metro area is enormous
         | (though perhaps not compared to many American cities like
         | Phoenix, if you just look at land area, but those cities have
         | nowhere near the density of Tokyo), and a map of the entire
         | thing is usually too complicated to bother with, so zoomed-in
         | maps are more useful. This one is showing central Tokyo (the
         | part encircled by the Yamanote line) and parts not too far from
         | it.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | More generally if you try to do the whole world in one go you
           | are not going to reach useful quality because every place has
           | something unique about it in the transit network itself and
           | also the map is curated by different people who do things
           | differently. The map might look similar to an outsider but
           | the particular codes, conventions and methods will be
           | different.
           | 
           | The answer for this, I think, is that either the OSM data
           | (input) needs to adapt to fit what this system can read or
           | patch rules and patch data can be applied to fix up the
           | output.
           | 
           | Either way it is a distributed project, people in Tokyo or
           | Hannover or any place where it is wrong are the people who
           | would know what is right so they should be engaged in the
           | solution.
        
       | YANNIC-G wrote:
       | How Exciting project! How come there are no lines in Hanover, for
       | example?
        
       | mqus wrote:
       | I was kinda expecting a reference to
       | https://blog.transitapp.com/how-we-built-the-worlds-pretties...
       | but I didn't find any while skimming it, even though the content
       | seems to be very similar
        
         | lqet wrote:
         | A 2018 paper by the same authors [0] (referenced in this work)
         | references an earlier blog post by the transitapp people on
         | Medium, but the link is no longer working.
         | 
         | > One approach that seems to use a model similar to ours was
         | described by Anton Dubreau in a blog post
         | 
         | [0] https://ad-publications.informatik.uni-
         | freiburg.de/ACM_effic...
        
       | geospatialover wrote:
       | This is really excellent work! It does seem to be missing
       | commuter train/rail systems in Canada, such as the GO Train
       | system in Ontario.
        
       | spothedog1 wrote:
       | Very cool, I've been working on getting Qlever setup and using it
       | as my main triple store. Was excited to see this hit my feed
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-12 23:01 UTC)