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

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 9 12:52:03 UTC 2020

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 13:44, Jarek PiĆ³rkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca> wrote:

> 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

As I recall, the example Warin was complaining about was part of a
relation linking sections of defunct railway in different states
(razed, abandoned, etc.)  It would certainly be possible to deal
with portions that have been converted to roads, cycleways or
footpaths by inserting them into the relation as what they are,
rather than what they were (preferably with some tag indicating
they followed the route of the former railway).  That might
get rid of some of the objections.

That doesn't get around the problem of sections where buildings or
fields or whatever have replaced the former railway.  I doubt that
argument will be settled as easily.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200609/bf3b2260/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list