[OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Aug 21 07:22:36 UTC 2015

sent from a phone

> Am 20.08.2015 um 14:59 schrieb Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com>:
> where is the railway here ? were are the rails ?

there aren't any rails, but there is a railbed, this cutting wouldn't make sense for a cycleway, would it? (inappropriate effort)

> why should we keep
> any mention about "rails" when it's a cycleway now ?

because it's a cycleway in a railbed?

> map what we see,
> the path or track and the cuttings/embankments.

map what we see does not mean to only look the next 2 meters in front of you. There clearly is an artificial cutting and if you look at this in a bigger context you (or at least someone else who neither isn't a railway expert) can likely understand that this is a former railway.
railway=dismantled means there is no railway currently but there are clear traces / remains of a railway (because if there weren't we would not put it in Osm).

How do you "see" that a highway is primary? without looking at a bigger picture you won't.  if we mapped like you suggest, we would only map highway=road... 


More information about the talk mailing list