[Tagging] inconsistencies in bridge

[Dave F.]

  On 27/09/2010 17:37, Lennard wrote:
> And when I cycle such a thing and want to map it, it's:
>
> highway=cycleway
>
> And I'm done. How am I to know there used to be rails infrastructure 
> there, years (and years) ago?

If you know - tag it; if not - don't. It's not vital, but could be useful.

>
> But I'm biased. We render them on the mapnik map, and that's mostly 
> where my discomfort stems from. It would be fine to have the tags just 
> for the purpose of generating dedicated railways maps that also show 
> all the glory of past, but what the heck are they doing on the current 
> map?

I partially agree with you.

If it's a physical entity that was an old railway line but is still 
visible, such a bridge or a cutting/embankment, map & tag it, including 
the railway=abandoned tag if you're aware of it.

However if there is *no* visible evidence of it then it shouldn't be 
mapped. OSM is for current data only.

Historical maps should use OSM as background & overlay such data, but 
*not* include it in the database?

Cheers
Dave F.