[Tagging] Does disused:railway=* require railway=disused?

Alexander Matheisen AlexanderMatheisen at ish.de
Thu Jul 28 08:43:16 UTC 2016


Hello,

adding railway=disused additionally to disused:railway=* ensures
backward compatibility, so that renderers which do not consider
lifecycle prefixes still produce good results.

It might also be easier for some renderers just to look at the value of
railway=* than using rendering rules like "if there is a
disused:railway=* tag then render a disused track, if there is an
abandoned:railway=* tag, ... otherwise render the value of railway".

This tagging is redundant and not necessary for using lifecycle
prefixes, but at the moment it seems to be a good compromise.


Regards
Alex


Am Donnerstag, den 28.07.2016, 08:54 +0200 schrieb David Marchal:
> Hello, there.
> 
> I've been told in a JOSM ticket (
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/12866#comment:2) that the wiki
> states that disused:railway=* requires railway=disused, and, indeed,
> the wiki says that (
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:railway). I don't
> understand why as, AFAIK, the lifecycle prefixing doesn't requires
> this, as it merely intends to suppress the(highway|railway|*)=disused
> tagging. Requiring to keep this deprecated and redundant data sounds
> inconsistent and confusing to me, especially if this requirement is
> limited to railways. How do things stand regarding this matter?
> 
> Awaiting your answers,
> 
> Regards. 		 	   		  
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160728/91bf2523/attachment.sig>


More information about the Tagging mailing list