[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - More Consistency in Railway Tagging

[Martin Atkins]

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.