[Talk-us] Rail westerly

[stevea]

Alexander writes:
>I was trying to say, "Let's not duplicate work." It's not a waste, but I
>wanted to let you know I was going to be remapping that segment anyway.

Thanks.  Good to be working with you!  (And other OSM railfans in the 
USA).  I'll stay away from / not edit this segment, but I'm beginning 
to better utilize your tagging inclinations as they seem to be 
correct OSM tagging and render better with ORM.  ORM's tagging 
guidelines (on OSM's wiki) are clear that there are three distinct 
components in its section Railway Lines:  "Railway Lines are mapped 
with relations, and split between three categories that should not be 
mixed up: infrastructure, railway route, and train route."  I had to 
re-read this part of this very comprehensive wiki a few times to get 
the hang of how to do these three relation styles (well, as a "first 
cut" in the USA, way tags for infrastructure, possibly a Railway Line 
relation -- some overlap here -- for physical infrastructure as well, 
and then two relations for "Railway Route" and "Train Route.")

This tagging scheme is extremely rich:  it is well thought out and 
seems to work very well for Germany where it was developed (together 
with the ORM renderer), though there are provisions to make 
country-specific tagging schemes, too.  Excellent!  While I don't 
think we need to do this (yet?) in the USA, good that we can.

So, a "simplified first step" is to tag ways (railway=rail, 
railway=tram, railway=light_rail, railway=subway...) with physical 
infrastructure tags (usage=main if true, service=siding if true...) 
and name=Subdivision Name (where known), possible with owner= and/or 
operator= tags as well.  The richness of potential tagging includes 
signalling, interlocking, electrification, crossings... but while we 
should strive to enter these where known, they seem less important 
than this "simplified first step."  A "complete first step" would be 
to then get "infrastructure relations" complete.  The second and 
third steps of Railway Route and Train Route (relations) can come 
later, but if there are routes known, they can proceed directly to 
relations -- though the physical infrastructure (whether as ways or 
relations) really must come first to do that.  Clear as mud, right?

(I think OSM finally has Caltrain "about correct" in California's Bay 
Area, but only perhaps these first two steps or so).

The upshot/short version?  I strongly believe this should be better 
worked on here in the USA to our rail, and that we have a LOT of work 
(research, surveys, editing...) to do to achieve this.

Excellent project we have mapping our beautiful home planet, here:  Go, OSM!

SteveA
California