[Talk-us] Rail tagging in US (and North America): operator=* and reporting_marks=*

Sat Jun 13 21:43:30 UTC 2020

I guess I have been confused all this time.

Nathan P
email: natfoot at gmail.com

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:49 PM Clay Smalley <claysmalley at gmail.com> wrote:

> If I'm not mistaken, the examples you've given are instances of
> railway:track_ref=*, not ref=*.
>
> Throwing my two cents in here—that coincides with the way I personally use
> railway:track_ref=*. My understanding is that this uniquely identifies
> tracks within a line, station or yard, and is not synonymous with ref=*
> which seems to be a globally (nationally? operator-wide?) unique identifier.
>
> Here's an example in a station in Germany:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/20889332
>
> In this case, track segment (ref=) 2610 is the (railway:track_ref=) 4th
> out of 8 parallel tracks at Neuss Central. In my experience, tracks in
> North America tend to be numbered extensively this way (Main Track 2, Yard
> Track 57, etc.). I've been filling railway:track_ref=* in with this
> information throughout California and the Northeast. I think ref=* would be
> useful information to fill in though I want to be sure about the definition
> of ref=* and that the source of information is authoritative and freely
> usable.
>
> Looking forward to how this discussion turns out.
>
> -Clay
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:12 PM Natfoot <natfoot at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Chuck,
>> I think you make some good points in your email.  I would discourage the
>> hang ups on the diffring railroad terminology as it is different by
>> railroad and location.  Coming to a decision on how we are going to tag is
>> more important. I agree that line segments are useful and interested to
>> hear how you would suggest to tag them.
>>
>> Here some examples of the use of the ref=* tag
>> https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=39.77267707885666&lon=-104.98619109392166&zoom=18&style=standard
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=39.78832735578315&lon=-104.99941036105156&zoom=19&style=standard
>>
>>
>> https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=41.860825816587464&lon=-87.63588219881058&zoom=18&style=standard
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nathan P
>> email: natfoot at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:28 AM Chuck Sanders <nathhad at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nathan, thanks - I've been thinking over your email and use case since
>>> coffee this morning, and looking for the right questions to pick your brain
>>> too, so that we can get the documentation right in the NA tagging wiki, and
>>> all of us on the same page.  I also started working up a a NA-specific and
>>> simplified JOSM tagging preset, so that's part of my impetus to really
>>> start getting into the weeds on this - part of my goal of the preset is to
>>> make it easy for all of us to tag consistently on the important tags ... so
>>> a huge part of that is making sure everything I do *agrees* with what
>>> everyone else understands those important tags to be!
>>>
>>> In particular, I can see the value of that BNSF track segment document
>>> you've been working on with others, and completely agree that's also
>>> information that should be captured properly in our metadata as well, I'm
>>> just trying to understand myself whether the ref tag is likely to be the
>>> right tag to do that.
>>>
>>> So far, I'm familiar with at least two different sets of "line numbers"
>>> in the US, and I haven't seen either used consistently before in the US in
>>> the way I understand that ref tag was meant to be used.
>>>
>>> One is the number set that started with the ICC Valuation Map Sections
>>> 100 years ago.  A lot of that data persisted long term, and I still see
>>> references in current documents, especially with NS material (I'm an east
>>> coast guy).  I also still see that referenced and used in a good bit of my
>>> CSXT documentation.  I've seen some of the related numbers also referred to
>>> as accounting numbers, and these do appear in certain current FRA records
>>> as well.
>>>
>>> The second is the "newer" FRA Line Segment numbers.  I believe the way
>>> FRA intended these to be used when they directed the creation of this
>>> system is the closest analogy we have to the German route numbers I was
>>> referring to.  NS does keep them on their track charts, but I haven't seen
>>> them on much CSX documentation.  Interestingly, even though these are meant
>>> to be used in the crossing number inventory forms, I often see this omitted
>>> in NS forms (even ones revised and completed recently), though it's usally
>>> completed in CSX forms.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, as I work as a bridge inspector and designer and not a
>>> track inspector (and have always worked peripherally to the railroads and
>>> not directly for them), I'm not directly working with the same information
>>> you are as a track inspector.  Have these line segment numbers really
>>> finally been adopted as real, working route numbers?
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>> VA
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:30 AM Natfoot <natfoot at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry I saw your email in the ORM list and responded directly.
>>>> I find line segment numbers on track charts and timetables. I mostly
>>>> work with lines that have left BNSF or its predecessors so I have
>>>> line segments that were assigned by those railroads.  Here is a great list
>>>> of line segments of the BNSF/BN/GN/NP Etc.
>>>> .
>>>> http://www.nprha.org/NP%20Track%20Segments%20of%20BNSF/BNSF%20Track%20Segments%20Version%2010.pdf
>>>>
>>>> I'm on line segments, 403, 405, 408, and 411.
>>>> And I don't trust the FRA database to be accurate.
>>>>
>>>> Nathan P
>>>> email: natfoot at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 8:45 PM Chuck Sanders <nathhad at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd love any information you can send regarding any sort of route
>>>>> number in use here like you're discussing. I've worked around the US rail
>>>>> industry for several decades (federal bridge engineer), and have never
>>>>> heard of such a thing, so I'm very curious.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not talking about the FRAARCID in the FRA dataset, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> And I have to say, while "don't tag for the renderer" is almost always
>>>>> right, it also doesn't mean that a tag that works well already is
>>>>> automatically wrong, provided it also doesn't damage the validity of
>>>>> integrity of your dataset, and is consistent with the data scheme.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Chuck
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 10:38 PM Natfoot <natfoot at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Chuck,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank You for your time fixing the reporting marks section.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Railroad Line numbers do exist for railroads in the United States and
>>>>>> Canada.
>>>>>> Ref= is for the use of line numbers.  I can send you links to line
>>>>>> numbers.  Line numbers were given to a line by the railroad when it was
>>>>>> laid and often lasts it's entire lifetime, without a change. The other way
>>>>>> I see it used is to identify what track number it is: Eg Main 1, or you are
>>>>>> in a yard and there is track 1, 2, 3, etc.  Both of these are examples of
>>>>>> track numbers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I will discourage the changing of in use tags for the soul
>>>>>> purpose of editing for the renderer.  This is a renderer problem and not a
>>>>>> problem with OSM.    Here is the wiki about not editing for the renderer
>>>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  There is a OpenRailwayMap email list.  I was just there
>>>>>> chatting about how Traffic Control is different from Train Protection. I
>>>>>> will agree that ORM under represents the data from North America that is
>>>>>> already within the map.  Please make these suggestions in the ORM list to
>>>>>> make the ORM renderer more usable as you have described.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quote from your email:
>>>>>> "  The label is occasionally the spelled out operator name, but most
>>>>>> commonly (better than 90% of examples) the operator reporting marks, which
>>>>>> serve as a standardized shorthand.  Even the names, as we tag them in the
>>>>>> name field, are rarely used to refer to the lines, and are essentially
>>>>>> never used on mapping here.They're the absolute last-choice designator, and
>>>>>> you *really* have to hunt to find any rail map in the US (including by the
>>>>>> operators) that labels any line by name."   " That's the US industry
>>>>>> standard."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   All of this paragraph are style choices when rendering the data
>>>>>> from within OSM. If you would like this to change, talk to the ORM list or
>>>>>> make a better renderer. I will reject your assertion that we should dumb
>>>>>> down the map just becuase that is the way TOPO had it.  If you are a
>>>>>> railroad owner and you are worried about the amount of information on OSM
>>>>>> that is a valid argument but that is not the way you are presenting this as
>>>>>> of now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts on all of this. I agree that OpenStreetMap,
>>>>>> Open Railway Map, and the renderer could be improved to better show off
>>>>>> what we have here in North America. Researchers utilize OSM as we have the
>>>>>> most up to date railway map in the country of any data source and it is
>>>>>> important to maintain standards.  I believe that the wiki pertaining to
>>>>>> railway=* is confusing and the addition of continent specific tagging makes
>>>>>> it more difficult to understand.  If you would like to help me with
>>>>>> cataloging this information this is one of the side projects. But right now
>>>>>> I am over on Open Historical Map adding railroads over there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nathan P
>>>>>>> email: natfoot at gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20200613/c5bbdd84/attachment-0001.htm>