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

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Jun 9, 2020, 14:42 by jarek at piorkowski.ca:

> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 07:56, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 04:08, Jarek Piórkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Yet we wouldn't map Watling Street in OSM with a way tagged as
>>> roman_road=demolished nor roman_road=razed nor roman_road=abandoned
>>>
>>
>> Nope.  We'd map the portions that are existing ways like this:
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7063236
>>
>
> Could we do similar with torn-up railways?
>
> Then the parts where rails or railbed are actually remaining could be
> railway=abandoned or whatever, and parts with nothing remaining could
> be plain ways in a relation like > https://osm.org/way/498608783
>
No. I am OK with extreme broad interpretation of what counts as
remain of railway allowing it to map.

But mapping where nothing at all is remaining is clearly out of scope of 
OSM.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200609/bb813a07/attachment.htm>