Hallo,
Dit is een goede vraag. Volgens De Lijn is er geen verplaatsing (meer) voor die haltes.
Volgens deze pagina (https://www.oudenaarde.be/nl/nieuws/werken-op-en-rond-het-sint-jozefsplein) zitten we nu in fase 2+3, en Bulkendreef is beschikbaar voor het algemene verkeer.
Kan helaas niet overaal ter plaatse gaan controleren maar het lijkt dat de haltes wel terug zijn op de plein. Heb jij misschien informatie hierover?

Voor wat buslijnen betreft is het nu geregeld: 410 wordt omgeleid langs Houtlaan en 411/412 hebben een nieuwe reisweg die hier niet meer komt.

There are two stops with this name in OSM. They are both operated by TEC.

node/2866610882, ref:TECH=H4co109b
node/2866610883, ref:TECH=H4co109a
name:TEC=Comines/Komen Rue de la Victoire/Overwinningstraat

Those stops do exist. They are present in TEC’s current GTFS feed.

It is very trivial to find them on TEC’s website, e.g. https://www.letec.be/Itinerary/Detail%3FOriginStopId%3DH4co109b&JourneyFrom%3DCOMINES~2FKOMEN%2520Rue%2520de%2520la%2520Victoire~2FOverwinningstraat&OriginLatitude%3D50.7712515&OriginLongitude%3D3.0067022&DestinationStopID%3DH4co106d&JourneyTo%3DCOMINES~2FKOMEN%2520SNCB~2FStation&DestinationLatitude%3D50.7713526&DestinationLongitude%3D2.9975617&When%3Dnow&LeaveDate%3D26.01.2024%2520%25C3%25A0%252019%253A20&ArriveDate%3D26.01.2024%2520%25C3%25A0%252019%253A20&How%3Dbus&How%3Dtram&How%3Ddelijn&How%3Dstib&How%3Dsncb&WhenForm%3Dnow&IndexOf%3D0

Please learn how OSM works before dropping changeset comments like this. Had you simply inspected the tags of those stops, you would have easily understood they are *not* run by De Lijn anymore. This changeset perfectly reflects the current situation: those two stops are only operated by TEC.

You are providing a web link to stop 508193 which no longer exists. That is true… but this changeset correctly deleted it, so what is the problem? node/2778102142/history

Please provide the exact reference (OSM object) of what you believe to be incorrect from this changeset, and please explain what "name change" we made and that you claim to be wrong.

Hi there!

Gent Dampoort stops are not only those near the station—the bus station was rearranged quite recently—but also some stops here near the canal.

The 3 stops touched here appear to be correctly located, their ref details and location have a perfect match with official data and they are correctly located on the right-hand side of the road.
* 211804 Gent Dampoort C (node/9149594707)
* 210804 Gent Dampoort D1 (node/9149594709)
* 210805 Gent Dampoort D2 (node/9149594708)

And, again:
* The "name" tag in OSM is the public name, how it appears on stop signs or urban network map if any. Large cities such as Brussels or Antwerp, do not prefix the city name on every stop. Smaller cities (Gent, Brugge, Hasselt…) do.
* "name:De_Lijn" is the field containing the full text string matching the name found on De Lijn’s website, app or GTFS data. This is the place to store the full name containing appendixes such as "D1" or "Perron 1".

Bonjour, Est-il possible d'expliquer plus clairement la « correction » et de mettre la source de la modification svp ?
Ces deux arrêts ne sont pas dans la définition officielle de la ligne, sauf erreur ils ont été rajoutés à titre d'essai. C'est utile de le mentionner et/ou d'ajouter un lien vers la page du site du TEC qui signale ceci. Et ça évitera de rendre vos modifications suspectes.
Important aussi : les lignes de bus sont des relations ordonnées, la prochaine fois veillez à ajouter l'arrêt au bon endroit de la ligne entre Sombreffe et Corroy-le-Château car là vous les aviez ajoutés tout à la fin. On a corrigé.

aub altijd "ref:De_Lijn" gebruiken ipv. "ref" voor het haltenummer, anders wordt de halte niet herkend.
Groeten.

Les arrêts "Komen Fleur de Lin" et "Komen Molen" n’existent plus. Et operator=DLVB est le code pour Vlaams-Brabant, qui n'est pas l'entité qui exploite les lignes de De Lijn dans cette partie du pays.

Attention, ne pas importer des données depuis les GTFS de TEC ou De Lijn car ils contiennent tous les arrêts y compris ceux qui ont été supprimés récemment. Nous sommes occupés à nettoyer la carte de ce côté-ci, et c'est étonnant de voir ces arrêts revenir alors qu'ils ne sont plus desservis.

Attention à ne pas trafiquer le nom de certains arrêts aussi.

Merci.

Thanks for the new stop.

We are updating the routes in this area today. 107 and 144 already done, 155 will follow.

Some advice now: if you want to create a new bus stop, just add a node, a name and an operator. We are now deploying scripts to catch missing entries, so we can find them easily. Do not copy tags from other stops: some codes like ref:De_Lijn or ref:TEC are unique and should not be re-used for other stops.

Do you plan to do more work here with the bus relations?

I see 31 broken relations now and invalid roles for stops. We started fixing them one by one but repairing the damage will take several more hours of work; I prefer asking in case you had plans to do it yourself.

Beste
Deze lijn rijdt enkel vanaf 06/01/2024, toch?
Dit is zeer te vroeg om deze in OSM te mappen. Dit kan reizigers misleiden en haltes die nog niet in gebruik zijn, zullen waarschijnlijk worden gewist door de controlescripts.
Wat kunnen wij hier doen?

Sorry, we have to undo your change.
Tram 4 is currently limited to Zwaantjes. Disruptions that will last for several months are usually included in OSM data.

We added the following tag inside the route relation: "Temporarily shortened in Hoboken Zwaantjes" but you probably missed it.

Yes, true. We added etymology wikidata for hundreds of public transport stops, it was manual work, and apparently for this one I copied the name instead of the ID. Thanks for having changed it.

Hi! Can you please ignore all suggestions about TEC bus stops and routes from your software?
iD has a problem with its source list. Clicking on "upgrade tags" suggestions corrupts data.
Some suggestions are good but not those about buses. We will open a ticket for iD to ask they fix this asap.

Hi there. I am afraid your change causes data corruption.
This is the existing area for Armentières station, with all it takes. way/110719452
I don't know why OpenRailwayMap cannot handle stations as areas, but if you really want the station to be mapped as a node, you should transfer the tags from one object to the other. Your change creates a second station inside the existing one, this is wrong.
Please fix this as soon as possible.

Hello wwwouaiebe,

This is a known bug in osm-carto, there is a pending pull request aimed at solving it once and for all.
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/4797

Most other layers, e.g. ÖPNVKarte, Transport Layer or ORM can perfectly show railway platforms that have the covered=yes tag. But I agree with you that a newbie who believes that OpenStreetMap is just the default map style will have a hard time until this rendering bug is solved.

For UZ, this is an interesting suggestion, I’ll try to see what I can do.

Next time, please message me directly, do _not_ comment on random changesets, because it will mislead people into thinking that the changeset has a problem.

Hi!
2017, time flies, I didn’t realize it was so long. You are right. I restored the situation. My concern was that route relations were being flagged as incorrect but I cleaned them up now and removed the part to Moscou.
Thanks for this.

De Lijn calls it "Moeskroen Gerechtsplein"
https://www.delijn.be/nl/haltes/504305/

TEC calls it "Mouscron/Moeskroen Place de la Justice/Justitiepl."
https://www.letec.be/Planning/Details/Stop/MOUSCRON__MOESKROEN%2520Place%2520de%2520la%2520Justice__Justitiepl./H4mo161a

You will find the official names as name:De_Lijn and name:TEC respectively (node/2567895806).

The main name has been manually derived from the main operator’s name—this place is Wallonia, therefore TEC is the reference—but respects OSM conventions about multilingual names, therefore we use proper separator instead of mixing both languages as TEC does for its own stops.

OK, thanks, you’re welcome.
Have a nice day!