[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - 3rd and 4th rail (Paul Allen)

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 10 15:10:33 UTC 2020


On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 15:36, Garry Keenor <garry.keenor at gmail.com> wrote:

> @Paul Allen - thank you for your comment. I agree with you, and so I've
> softened the guidance around use of electrified=yes.
>

Thanks.  I often forget this myself, but we should strive to permit
step-wise
refinement - allow something to be mapped at least partially whilst
permitting
refinements to be added later.  If we insist on the whole enchilada or
nothing
we may get nothing when we could have had something.

A mapper with general railway experience would be able to determine the
> type with aerial imagery of a reasonable resolution - especially 3rd and
> 4th rail systems which are quite apparent.
>

Not all parts of the world have good aerial imagery. :(

Your proposal has for electrified=yes:

Used for electrified="3rd_rail" tracks.*This tag is to be used when the
system of electrification is unknown.  *

That "3rd_rail" should be removed.  In fact, so should tracks (it may be a
contact
line rather than an electrified track).  I'd suggest:

Used for electrified lines
*when the system of electrification is unknown. *

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200610/e3f651a8/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list