[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?
steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Sun Jan 3 01:59:01 UTC 2021
On Jan 2, 2021, at 5:39 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> So, if those still remaining bits get tagged as =abandoned, is something going to complain that you have disconnected sections of abandoned railway?
Here's my view: in my area of the Santa Cruz Mountains , South Pacific Coast Railroad  is a 140-year-old (or so) rail right-of-way (ROW) which was abandoned about 70 years ago. While the ROW is "mostly there" in OSM, segments ARE missing as they are effectively invisible from aerial view (obscured by redwood trees) or are inaccessible to do a ground-truth because of private property, dangerous access or other reasons preventing ground-truth of abandoned rail.
Some "parcels" (besides those through the City of Santa Cruz "closed areas" for watershed protection) I don't know much about their land ownership status as it reverted to "private property, not owned by a railroad" after what in the USA is a formal procedure to "abandon" a railroad by the railroad owning company (as it applies to the USA's federal-level Surface Transportation Board).
Nobody has complained about "disconnected sections of abandoned railway." (Or 'railroad' as we Yanks tend to say).
"Map. Map well." Well, as well as you can, anyway. If there are missing segments, there is usually a reason. If another Contributor wants to improve these "missing segments," have at them, please. Many hands make light work, crowdsourcing makes a great map.
More information about the Tagging