Discussion of abbreviation levels for public transport networks

[LaoshuBaby]

A full expansion that is too long may be visually boring, but it can also be confusing if only the abbreviation is provided. Therefore, I think it is possible to require that for networks that use abbreviations as displayName, even if there is no disambiguation problem, there should be brackets Indicate the central city or main service area of ​​the network

For example, #9303 can be "CTS (Strasbourgeois)"

For areas where there is indeed ambiguity, the original names will still be maintained.

For example,

"AMA (Autoridad Metropolitana de Autobuses)" and "displayName": "AMA (Azienda Mobilità Aquilana)"

or

"CATA (Massachusetts)" and "CATA (Michigan)"

[gosgtan]

Hi,

I don't find it confusing when there is only the abbreviation. When there is confusion, we already put a clarification in parentheses, it's well understood by everyone. In addition, I think that the contributors will get confused between the ambiguous cases for which clarification should be provided, and the non-ambiguous cases for which the central city or main service area should be put. It would be chaotic when the desire is for the whole to be homogeneous and standardized. I personally think that the current situation is satisfactory

[UKChris-osm]

I think for entries that have a logo available, an abbreviation shouldn't be to confusing. If someone is adding a particular brand / organisation, I think it's reasonable to assume they would be familiar with the logo, and in turn be able to add the correct tagging.

For entries with no available logo, a little more textural information would be handy.

[bhousel]

Display names can be anything, so I'm pretty ok with people using common sense.
These names will be used as the name for the preset in Rapid and JOSM, so they should be understandable to people scrolling through a long list.