[Talk-us] Rail westerly

[stevea]

Alexander Jones wrote:
>So, that's you? I've spent the past year-plus remapping rail lines in the
Central Valley. Right now, I'm finishing up the BNSF Mojave 
Subdivision  towards Barstow. A few tips:

* Please use the subdivision name where available. Using the railroad as the
name is redundant when the operator tag is set. I use the CPUC rail crossing
data [1] to find subdivision names.

Thanks, Alexander:  I had visited Union Pacific's web site to find 
some of these, but they keep them locked up under username and 
password access only.  Your CPUC pointer is an excellent public 
resource and very much appreciated (Microsoft Excel or OpenOffice is 
needed to open it).  "Rail System" and then "Division or Line" are 
the critical columns containing the data I've been looking for.  I 
guess (but don't know) that other states besides California have 
similar data available through their Public Utilities Commission (or 
equivalent).  I agree with you:  name= as the name of the railroad 
(owner) is incorrect, as a subdivision name is preferred, but in the 
event the way has no name= tag, I suppose it is better than nothing. 
But let us continue on to correcting with subdivision names where we 
can!

* I'm in the process of retracing most of the current and abandoned lines in
the San Joaquin Valley south of Stockton. Especially on the BNSF line, don't
waste your time.

I'm not sure why you think this is waste of time, but I appreciate 
the heads-up that you are working here!

* The way I see it, passenger lines are not automatically usage=main. But I
don't know of any passenger lines in California, except the Sprinter in
North SD County, that couldn't be seen as main lines.

Yes, it is a tentative "logical mapping" on my part to cautiously 
treat major (Amtrak's Pacific Surfliner, Coast Starlight, California 
Zephyr...) and "regional" or "commuter" (Metrolink, Coaster...) 
passenger rail infrastructure as usage=main.  I reserve usage=branch 
for well-identified (and logically in "the network" of rail's 
connectivity) branch rail.  If something is distinctly a light rail 
(SPRINTER, San Diego Trolley, VTA's trains in Silicon Valley...) we 
tag usage=light_rail.  Similar to tagging highways minimally on the 
ways and putting routing data (track infrastructure plus 
stops/platforms as members) in a relation IS a more correct method to 
do this, in my opinion.  Again, ways get name=Subdivision, operator= 
,owner= , THEN tag actual passenger routes with a route relation. 
Infrastructure tags on ways, route tags on a relation.  (Say it like 
a mantra!)

* I generally use 7 tags: railway=rail, operator=, old_railway_operator=,
name=, usage=, electrified=, and gauge=.

Yes, I'll use owner= if known, and it is name= which displays in ORM 
as the name of the line.  Many lines had name= as the service run 
upon them (like Caltrain instead of Union Pacific), and I have 
corrected this where I know it was wrong in OSM.  But I haven't 
corrected all of these, just the ones I know.  And now I think I'll 
have to go back and correct name=Union Pacific as the name of Union 
Pacific's subdivision for the line that Caltrain is run upon: 
Caltrain itself should be a relation.  And so on.

* I still use old-fashioned (according to OpenRailwayMap) route=railway
relations for the tracks. I don't think the relations are rendered, but I'm
not completely sure. But I keep the IDs in the org-mode files I use to
manage my work, so I could always switch the tag out if needed.

I didn't quite follow that (and I agree:  it appears route relations 
are not rendered in ORM).

* Overall, this is much needed work. Thanks for helping the rail 
quality in California!

Yeah!  Let's drum up others doing this in other states.  Kansas City 
has shaped up as a major hub, and Chicago, which I KNOW to be a major 
hub, still looks to be in its infancy w.r.t. proper infrastructure 
tagging.  It would be really cool to see the USA's only high-speed 
line (Amtrak's Acela service in the Northeast Corridor) to "light up 
red" in ORM.

NathanP wrote:
>Thanks Steve, I am working on what I can. Would like to have some 
>discussion on proper tuning of relations.  Many of these open 
>railway map tags are new to me.

There is an excellent and quite complete tagging documentation page 
at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging . 
Additional specific questions?  Ask here or off-list (either me, 
Alexander, or others who have been doing this and emerge as more 
knowledgeable).

Charlotte wrote:
>Thanks for the tip about openrailwaymap.org. I have aligned many
>railroads in Arizona and added many others. But I distrust the naming there,
>so I just have left that alone.
>Also, I don't know how to do relations, so, if you finish 
>California, feel free to make relations in Arizona.

Relations can be a challenge for some OSM contributors.  While it is 
technically possible to edit relations with either iD or Potlatch 2, 
I don't recommend it, as the GUI is klunky, confusing and 
error-prone.  JOSM is a much better editor to edit relations in OSM 
(imo), and while there is a learning curve that takes practice to get 
the hang of it, it is relatively short and is "only a small mountain 
to conquer."  You can do it!

Great to see this enthusiasm and good communication.

SteveA
California