[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - More Consistency in Railway Tagging
mart at degeneration.co.uk
Sat Apr 13 18:16:44 UTC 2013
On 04/13/2013 10:36 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
[snip the details]
> To sum this up: I'm aware that we have unsolved problems with our
> railway mapping scheme, and that it is hard to serve the needs of many
> different use cases at once. But your proposal feels like giving up and
> focusing exclusively on a generalized, road-centric map, and we should
> strive for more than that.
Thank you for the detailed and thoughtful feedback. One of your points
was that I deferred detail mapping to others; would you be more open to
this proposal if I were to expand it to include a mechanism for
separately mapping the details?
I'd hoped that could be addressed as a separate proposal, but it seems
like the loss of detail is the main hang-up people have with it as it
stands, so I'd be willing to spend a little time devising a strawman for
also representing the details of track and switch/point locations and
the perimeter of trackbeds if it would move the discussion forward.
More information about the Tagging