[OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at gmail.com
Fri Aug 14 11:00:08 UTC 2015

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 02:23:29 -0400
Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> wrote:

> What if I was to add the aqueduct which goes past Aqueduct Race Track
> on Long Island, NY? It is without question there (the name "Aqueduct"
> should be a pretty good hint), yet it cannot be seen anywhere. Why not
> map that? Why map the Catskill aqueducts, which also cannot be seen?

That is a good example. Buried railway tracks, that are known to exist
may be mapped (and marked as buried) and should not be deleted just
because this feature is not visible.

In another case where railway tracks that were removed, embankment
demolished and somebody build there houses. In that case railway
track should not be mapped in OSM because this feature is gone.

See for example

There were multiple bridges in this location. First constructed in 1335
(destroyed by fire), there was later a floating bridge, in 1801 next
documented bridge (quickly destroyed by a flood) and next one in 1844,
this time from stone. In 2010 footbridge/cyclebridge was constructed.

There are still well visible traces of bridge from 1844, maybe there
are some traces of older ones (aligned streets, maybe also some buried

But only a single bridge should be mapped at

Traces of bridges should be mapped as traces (tourism=attraction,
archeological site, navigation hazard) not things like [man_made=bridge;
status=burned in XIX century].

Or a railway case:
- completely and utterly removed railway, leaving no traces (road that
  replaced railway follows its course, but it is likely that railway
  itself followed available space).

This railway certainly should not appear in OSM.


More information about the talk mailing list