[talk-au] Converting railway= abandoned to highway=track

Andrew Hughes ahhughes at gmail.com
Sun Feb 14 23:02:58 UTC 2021

FYI: The Brisbane Valley Rail Trail sounds like a great reference

   - way:
   - relation: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2205845
   - ref: https://www.brisbanevalleyrailtrail.com.au/


On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 08:21, Josh Marshall <josh.p.marshall at gmail.com>

> Thanks for the feedback, Jono, Mike, Ewen, good points.
> I had considered already where the proposed trail or current accessible
> track deviates from the old railway, as there are indeed some collapsed
> bridges and deviations: some of the cuttings are completely overgrown and
> so the accessible track goes around on the high side. So I will do those as
> separate ways, but for where the new track matches the railway exactly I
> will double-tag the way. It's not actually open to vehicles from the public
> (there's some illegal 4wding happening at times), so will tag no to vehicle
> access.
> I checked the Fernleigh Track on OpenRailwayMap
> https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=-32.94859657974205&lon=-208.28267097473145&zoom=15&style=standard
> re: having the ways tagged as both highway=? and railway=abandoned and it
> shows up fine there.
> I will do a new relation for the proposed trail and update the old one
> with the missing segments (and TIL "gunzel"... interesting origin on that
> term :O - I'm not one myself but I can appreciate the hobby and will be
> careful to keep them happy.)
> Will use all your links as references and reply again when I'm done. Once
> I've done the updates, I will wait until they filter through to the fitness
> sites and then go check it all on the ground again.
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 2:57 PM Jonathon Rossi <jono at jonorossi.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:27 PM Josh Marshall <josh.p.marshall at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> My proposal is to alter the ways associated with the track to
>>> highway=track (it’s all wide enough for vehicles), but retain
>>> railway=abandoned, and add all the missing ways to the above relation.
>>> My main reasoning behind this is to raise it’s visibility as a walk and
>>> ride option, and allow routing along it, as current routers (Strava,
>>> Komoot) ignore it altogether (much to my annoyance). It’s what’s been done
>>> for locally, the Fernleigh Track (
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2269030), and elsewhere eg The
>>> Great Victorian Rail Trail (
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1043265)
>>> Now the other question is what should be done with the proposal as far
>>> as adding tags. This way is on the old rail line and part of the proposal,
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/243988974 has railway=abandoned,
>>> highway=proposed and proposed=cycleway. It’s all accessible now, so it
>>> should be highway=track (surface=unpaved), but then how to tag for the
>>> proposal?
>> I agree, it should have highway=track now if someone could drive on it.
>> That video on the council website looks like some significant work is going
>> into this project.
>> I'd drop the current "name=Richmond Vale Railway" tag (only if the tracks
>> have been removed), leave old_name, and add "proposed:name=Richmond Vale
>> Rail Trail". If the railway tracks remain (as they do in some sections of
>> imagery at some unknown date) and the rail trail is a different alignment,
>> you might need to map them separately.
>> --
>> Jono
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20210215/e03ebf8b/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list