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

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sat Jan 2 14:32:32 UTC 2021

On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 at 14:09, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

Previous discussions changed my mind on such cases and I am OK with mapping
> this -
> though we really should have some tagging to describe what kind of traces
> remained.
> Some time ago I retagged removed railway into
> railway=abandoned
> railway_remains:gravel=yes
> railway_remains:railway_signs=yes
> service=spur

Sometimes not even the gravel remains, or it is so overgrown by weeds
it is not easily spotted even on the ground.  However, if the right of way
still remains then there are likely to be fences or hedges bracketing the
former way.  And often there will be embankments, cuttings, bridges
and tunnels which make no sense without knowing there was a
former railway line.

I'm not sure it's sensible to do more than we have now: disused track
(perfectly usable if somebody wanted to run a train on it), abandoned track
(needs work before trains could run on it), razed track (you'd need to do a
lot of work, which might include regrading and re-ballasting before new
could be laid).  Oh, and planned laying of new track where a razed track is
now, and/or construction.

You can find a mix of all of those on former working lines that have been
taken over by a preservation society, especially when the society intends
to restore a working tourist attraction along the full length for which they
have the right of way.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210102/c55fd5cd/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list