[Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails

[Heiko Jacobs]

Michał Borsuk schrieb:
 > I agree with your arguments. Then "former"?

"former" is a little bit non-specific.
A disused or abandoned railway may also be called "former"

> "Disappeared" cannot be used, because it implies that the railway just 
> rolled itself and went home for Feierabend.  Or a UFO took it one night.

For real railway fans only an UFO can explain why someone can
have the absurd idea to remove any rail ;-)

In times when discarded metall ist valuable enough also other
explainations will exists ...

> I don't like "levelled" for another reason: it is a word that is not 
> easily understood for those "English-challenged", that is beginners. 
> It's not a word that easily translates into other languages. For this I 
> would propose "removed". (Then it does not contrast with "dismantled" 
> very much, but frankly I am getting lost in those distinctions).

Better than "levelled" might be the words "converted" or "transformed"?
converted/transformed to farmland/residential areas/village green/...
including filling of cuttings and removing embankments ...

"removed" might also be ok if it is clear enough, that the whole
way incl. cutt./emb. is removed, not only the rails?

> - proposed/planned
> - construction
> - ()
> - disused
> - abandonded
> - removed/dismantled/former (if there really is a difference)

dismantled is seldomely in use an I think similar to abandoned

> - [*=bike path]

If I found a cycleway as former railway I just gave both tags:
cycleway and abandoned railway.
Might be I change them to the new word ...
If the cycleway uses the old railway gravel under the waterbound
macadam a little bit of railway still exists ;-)

Mueck