[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

Phake Nick c933103 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 6 15:18:32 UTC 2020


在 2020年6月6日週六 11:03,Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> 寫道:

> On 6/6/20 8:02 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> > I need to reopen this thread.
> >
> >  I do object strongly to the invitation to remove the
> > razed/dismantled-railway tag in the case of railway tracks have been
> > replaced by roads with the same geometry. To the contrary this is one
> > of the more fortunate cases where the original route has been
> > conserved, and it is easy to travel along a historical railroad.
> > I admit that I have a faible for industrial archeology (like former
> > railways, watermills, old canals) but they do have touristic value and
> > for that reason should be in OSM.
>
>
> As a general tourist I would have no interest in traveling along a
> railway route here nothing remains of the railway.
>

OSM is not *only* for general tourist.

> If something remains then map the remains, not the bits that no longer
> exist.
>

As repeatedly covered in this thread with examples being cited, a
razed/dismantled railway could still leave indication for its railroad
alignment on the ground.

Where an old railway route passes through private residential houses,
> commercial buildings, car parking area .. I don't think that should be
> in OSM yet people map it...
>

You can have rows of private houses and blocks of factories building over
former railway yet the railway remain can still be visible on the ground.

A historian/archeologist may have interest in documenting the old
> railway route and facilities, they can and should use OHM.
>

They're not historical, they're currently existing as remain, and is of
interest for anyone trying to understand or utilize such area.

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200606/047af449/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list