[Tagging] RFC - Discourage railway=preserved

Jeroen Hoek mail at jeroenhoek.nl
Mon Apr 12 18:25:06 UTC 2021


On 12-04-2021 19:25, Stefan Keller wrote:
> ... but this is just a shiny attempt of mine to offer alternatives of
> this problematic "*.*=yes" proposal.

As noted on the talk-page; this is not a proposal proposing
railway:preserved=yes, which is a comparatively widely used, de facto
tag which is here taken as an established fact.

This proposal proposes to deprecate railway=preserved. This is a useful
proposal, because already it highlighted a rendering issue in Carto.
After this proposal, there will be one way to tag preserved railway
lines, based on mapper feedback over the course of years:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Taghistory_between_railway%3Dpreserved_and_railway-preserved%3Dyes.png

As noted in the current proposal, maintaining railway=preserved is at
this point untenable and undesirable. However, if you wish to discuss
the suitability of the tag railway:preserved=yes, you could draft a
proposal to replace it.

Whether you do or don't, it should have no effect on the current
mini-proposal, because you would either suggest:

* a new tag (which would certainly require deprecating railway=preserved);

* keeping railway=preserved (which is not likely to succeed due to the
reasons pointed out in this proposal and the trend towards using
railway:preserved=yes);

* not tagging the 'preserved' status at all (which would again require
deprecating railway=preserved).

Also, calling a proposal 'half-baked' and using phrases like 'prefix
fooling' is not very civil, and disheartening for contributors who wish
to improve on the project.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210412/b05baeaa/attachment.sig>


More information about the Tagging mailing list