[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