[OSM-talk] Ways in tunnels

[Erik Johansson]

On 10/3/06, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> wrote:
> Is there a consenus / best practice on how to tag ways which run through
> tunnels?
>
> Lets assume a rail line (A-D) which runs through a tunnel (B-C)
>
> A_____________B   __   __  __  __  __ C________D
>
> There seem various ways of tagging this:
>
>
> 1)  Way A-D tagged as railway = rail; and segments B-C tagged as tunnel=yes
>
> 2)  Way A-B   C-D tagged as railway =rail.; and way B-C tagged as railway =
> rail, tunnel =yes
>
> 3)  Way A-D tagged as railway = rail; and way B-C tagged as railway = rail
> tunnel=yes

I always use 1, though I'm mapping by bike so I've never mapped tunnel
more than 200meter.

Then I would like to use 3, because creating a way of all the segments
seems like an extension of  tagging segments as a tunnel.

I don't like 2. Because; a new way signifies something is beginning,
and sure the tunnel is beginning, but the tracks doesn't stop here.

I think the argument is fundamental to ways, is it just a grouping of
segements that have the same tag. Or is it an object with certain
specific properties.