[Talk-ca] Light rail mapping questions

[James]

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:train

Train does exist as a vehicle type

As for cars:
I think it would be motor_vehicle:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motor_vehicle

I got the vehicle types from:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Transport_mode_restrictions

On Oct 22, 2016 3:10 PM, wrote:

> Could lanes work?
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes
>
> Example:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Two_driving_directions
>
> What ever the train tag would be:
> train:lanes:forward=no|yes
> train:lanes:backwards=no|yes
> Then for passenger cars would be opposite?
> car:lanes:forward=yes|no
> car:lanes:backwards=yes|no
>
> I'm not sure about this maybe Micheal has more insight on this
>
> On Oct 22, 2016 2:45 PM, "Mike Boos" <mike.boos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Michael for your reply
>
>
>> Am 18.10.2016 um 03:52 schrieb Mike Boos:
>> > Along on-road sections, the dedicated rail right-of-way moves from
>> > centre-running to the outsides of the street at certain intersections.
>> (A
>> > by-product of some of the political compromises in route choices.) Does
>> > anyone know of any examples of tracks going from the centre to the side
>> of
>> > the road with traffic lanes in OSM? I expect these are going to look
>> messy.
>>
>> Look at any German, Austrian or Swiss city of your choice where every
>> tram track is mapped as a single way in OSM (i.e. no tracks=2). I need
>> more details (show us photos) to give a useful answer.
>>
>
> Here's an example of an intersection that's largely complete:
> https://twitter.com/mikeboos/status/789892670453723136
> The tracks on the right/behind of most of the photos are centre-running
> between the two directions of car travel. Across the intersection, on the
> left of the photos, one track changes sides with the travel lane so that it
> lies between the sidewalk and the roadway. (The other track branches off
> onto the perpendicular road.)
>
> > There are also portions of the line that will share track with a freight
>> > corridor. From what I can tell, convention appears to be to tag it with
>> the
>> > heavier mode, i.e. railway=rail instead of railway=light_rail. However,
>> the
>> > use of the track for freight is quite small - at most one freight train
>> > to/from Elmira uses the track at night, when light rail service won't be
>> > operating. Should the track still be marked as 'rail' instead of
>> > 'light_rail,' or should we attempt to have the tags represent the
>> dominant
>> > use? (At present, some of these are tagged as railway=construction, even
>> > though the freight train has been consistently using it overnight. This
>> > section is also largely complete.)
>>
>> Yes. If the track is still usable for freight trains (even if limited to
>> certain hours), it is a normal railway track and therefore gets
>> railway=rail. What you describe is called "Karlsuhe model" – don't
>> confuse it with our tagging scheme at OSM. ;-)
>>
>> I assume, that some people of Grand River Transit have visited the
>> German cities Karlsruhe and/or Kassel. :-) The first one has been
>> operating a tram-train system for more than 40 years.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlsruhe_Stadtbahn
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassel_RegioTram
>>
>
> I don't know if I'd characterize this as a "Karlsuhe model" train-tram -
> the system is entirely within a single urban area (even if it does span two
> adjacent cities), it just uses an existing rail corridor in some places.
> Unlike the Karlsuhe system, the vehicles have only a single operating
> voltage.
>
>
>> Tag the tracks as they look like. Sections where tracks share space with
>> cars [1] are railway=tram. Where the trams are physically separated from
>> the traffic [2], it's a railway=light_rail. That's how tagging works in
>> cities which only have *one* tram/light rail system. If the city has two
>> or three (low-floor tram and high-floor light rail; some German cities),
>> it becomes more difficult because we also try to get the systems
>> distinguishable (there are use cases). But that is not important now and
>> the reason why Germans discuss correct tagging of trams, light rails and
>> subways at their OSM Forum over multiple pages and threads. :-)
>>
>
> There are not really spaces shared with cars, (thank goodness) so the only
> appropriate tag along roads is light_rail.
>
> > Further, there is gauntlet track to allow freight trains to pass station
>> > platforms. Do we tag the track closest to the platform as
>> > railway=light_rail and the outer track as railway=rail? There's some
>> > discussion here on gauntlet tracks here that suggests this is the case
>> in
>> > Europe: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=29131
>>
>> It is the case in Kaufungen near the city of Kassel which has a
>> Karlsruhe-like tram-train system ("Regiotram").
>>
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Haltestelle_Niederka
>> ufungen_Mitte_02.JPG
>>
>> Yes, the track for heavy trains is a normal train track (railway=rail)
>> while the outer ones can only be used by light rail vehicles due to the
>> smaller structure gauge. Therefore the light rail track gets
>> railway=light_rail. Because we map one way per track at the centerline
>> of the track, there are two (in Kaufungen three) parallel tracks and all
>> get railway:interlaced=yes. This is useful for routing engines.
>>
>> If there were up to date Mapillary photos, I could give more and better
>> advice. (Mapillary photos by pedestrians are better because are located
>> on the sidewalk)
>>
>
> I think that makes sense. Here's an example of the gauntlet track at one
> of the stations: https://twitter.com/Canardiain/status/768589656581
> 509122/photo/1
>
>
>>
>> Greetings from Karlsruhe
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Boos, MASc.
> mike.boos at gmail.com
> 519-580-5804
> http://real.uwaterloo.ca/~mboos
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20161022/9c2daf49/attachment-0001.html>