[talk-au] Historical rail lines

Mark Rennick mark.rennick at iinet.net.au
Fri Nov 30 07:23:35 GMT 2012



I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. 


If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping,
then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain,
particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road
or linear park.  


From: Matt White [mailto:mattwhite at iinet.com.au] 
Sent: Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM
To: 'talk-au'
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines


Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap
the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three
overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as
historical artifacts, then everyone is cool?

If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't.


On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote:

Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There
are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely
developed over and no trace remains.


Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there
are currently traces there then it's mapping the present.



From: Steve Bennett [mailto:stevagewp at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM
To: Matt White
Cc: talk-au
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White <mattwhite at iinet.com.au> wrote:

Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on
the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of
admin boundaries either

The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery
slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know
that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there
is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or
landfill, because it isn't. It's a park....

IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the "do we map historical stuff"
debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the
top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train
lines are different. They just are.

To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping "the
1890 route of a long forgotten train line". We're mapping the vestigial
traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any
information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121130/a48fb0d7/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list