Hi Matt,<br> It seems we've reached the point of simply restating our views. I don't think yours represents consensus - but please discuss it on the main OSM talk list if you want.<br><br>Steve<br><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Matt White <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mattwhite@iinet.com.au" target="_blank">mattwhite@iinet.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>"Abandoned" makes it sounds like there
are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains
running on it. <br>
<br>
But that's not the case - in the 4km the line used to run on there
are 11 remaining artifacts, the largest being a station building
(old North Carlton station), the smallest being a single 4 metre
track section in Edinburgh gardens, or the one remaining concrete
pylon base. They are the vestigial traces that need to be mapped.
As for the rest, it's a mostly a park now with a bike track along
it (the bits that aren't are houses) ... and that's what it should
be mapped as.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<br>
On 30/11/2012 6:23 PM, Mark Rennick wrote:<br>
</div></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><div class="im">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Matt<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I
believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">If
it is necessary to have a current physical feature to
justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill
earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway
reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear
park. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div><div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext" lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext" lang="EN-US"> Matt White [<a href="mailto:mattwhite@iinet.com.au" target="_blank">mailto:mattwhite@iinet.com.au</a>]
<br></span></p><div class="im">
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM<br>
</div><b>To:</b> 'talk-au'<div class="im"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines<u></u><u></u></div><p></p>
</div>
</div><div class="im">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Right. So if I delete the mapped rail
line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of
track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead
pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that
remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool?<br>
<br>
If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped.
Otherwise, it won't.<br>
<br>
Matt<br>
<br>
On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Actually,
the slope is slippery. People have made it about old
roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where
they have been completely developed over and no trace
remains.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Mapping
the traces of an old rail line isn’t historical mapping.
If there are currently traces there then it’s mapping the
present.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
Steve Bennett [<a href="mailto:stevagewp@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:stevagewp@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Matt White<br>
<b>Cc:</b> talk-au<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt
White <<a href="mailto:mattwhite@iinet.com.au" target="_blank">mattwhite@iinet.com.au</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Admin
boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may
be intangible on the ground, but they are also
current. We don't keep historical versions of admin
boundaries either<br>
<br>
The problem with the historical thing is that to my
mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me
that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it
was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish
tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I
certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or
landfill, because it isn't. It's a park....<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the "do
we map historical stuff" debate comes up, it's
always about train lines. That is, we're still at
the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting
to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different.
They just are.<br>
<br>
To reiterate what I said before in different words:
we're not mapping "the 1890 route of a long
forgotten train line". We're mapping the vestigial
traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not
proposing to record any information about when lines
opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. <br>
<br>
<br>
Steve<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>