[Talk-transit] Old Railways

Tijmen Stam mailinglists at iivq.net
Sun May 19 08:11:26 UTC 2019


On 18-05-19 17:40, Tim Saunders wrote:
> I suspect I am a lone voice but I don't agree.  The thing that 
> differentiates railways from a lot of historical features is they form a 
> network, some if which is still an operating railway and a lot of which 
> is still visible in the ground.  Having the extant sections in one 
> database and the razed/dismantled sections in another is just making it 
> unnecessarily complex to form a picture of the entire network, which for 
> the sake of a few additional ways on OSM (which I agree would not 
> generally be rendered) can be easily solved.

Roads do also form a network. And it would be equally interesting to see 
how roads from yesteryear connected to it. Yet we don't keep those on 
OSM (I personally removed miles of highway, from two different highways, 
the minute they went out of use - or actually I didn't, I first made 
them highway=road as the actual tarmac stayed visible for a few 
months/years)

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tim Saunders
> 
> 
> Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 16:03:43 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
> Cc: Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics
>          <talk-transit at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Old railways
> This is undesirable, OSM is not a place to map historic data. When I 
> encounter such mismapped
> objects I remove them.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
> 




More information about the Talk-transit mailing list