[OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads

Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 20 12:59:34 UTC 2015


On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> wrote:
> Frederik Ramm writes:

> The trouble is that I'm being
> threatened with having my contributions deleted!
>
> DELETED!
>
> Why incentive do I have to correctly tag, when people are saying "Go
> ahead, I'm just going to delete it anyway and I'm going to encourage
> other people to do the same thing."

Russ, seriously. Many people already told you that if it is removed
physically, then we remove it in OSM as well. Even if you use a tag
"dismantled", the point isn't changing : we don't keep removed
features in OSM. We map the present (and basically, I'm also if favour
to delete the future, like the  "planned" stuff when it's not 100%
sure). There is a large consensus on that in the community. Why are
you insisting ? If you like, check the OHM project which is dedicated
for historical maps.

I got some examples from the net:

[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dunstable,_Dismantled_railway_and_National_Cycle_Network_Route_6_-_geograph.org.uk_-_146322.jpg

where is the railway here ? were are the rails ? why should we keep
any mention about "rails" when it's a cycleway now ? map what we see,
the path or track and the cuttings/embankments.

[2] http://ukbeach.guide/photos/uk-photos.php?photo=15295
[3] http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2496379

"disused" is fine here.

[4] https://outoftheloopdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/p6090099.jpg

Who knows that this track was a railway from 1881 to 1961 ? why should
we keep any "railway" tag here ?

Pieren



More information about the talk mailing list