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

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 4 00:40:03 UTC 2021


On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 at 00:07, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> The question is whether we are willing to accept some railway=razed to
> fill the gaps to have former railway routes complete, where otherwise there
> are some observable traces.
>

I would say that, since railway=razed doesn't show on standard carto but
can be rendered by specialized carto, there is merit to retaining it where
there are no obvious conflicts with other objects.   In such cases the
right of
way may still exist (and maybe the line could be resurrected, or it becomes
a cyclepath, or whatever).  If nothing else, it makes sense of what would
otherwise be disjoint fragments.

The problem comes when objects have been built over it.  The right of
way clearly no longer exists.  It is nice to have the razed section to
fill in the gaps, but it makes life more complicated for people editing
the map.

My preference would be along the lines of "Mappers MAY retain
razed sections if they are happy with any extra work it may
cause them.  Mappers MAY delete razed sections if those
sections cause problems editing objects that overlay them."

I'm not happy with a rule that says razed sections MUST be
removed in all situations or that razed sections MUST be
removed if any object overlays them.  If it's causing
you problems then get rid of it, if it's not causing you
problems then you don't have to delete it, but you
may.

Yeah, I know, we don't map non-existent objects.  Mostly.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210104/8ccddd74/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list