[OSM-talk] THIS is the kind of enthusiasm some would reject

[EthnicFood IsGreat]

Russ is a railfan.  I am a railfan.  We are a group of people for whom
railroads hold a lot of interest and nostalgia.  Being able to see
locations of abandoned railways in OSM is very desirable for us.  (Not
to mention that some of them will eventually be converted to rail
trails, and so their location is important from that aspect.)  I guess
we're asking that an exception to the "verifiable features only" rule
be made for these features.  Simply confining abandoned railroad
features to OHM is not a good solution, because without being able to
view them in the context of existing features, they lose a lot of
their value.

A long time ago someone decided that administrative boundaries would
be granted an exception.  We are also mapping cycle routes.  Is it too
much to ask for abandoned railroads to be granted an exception too?  I
know the classic argument against this is that it would open the
floodgates for all kinds of other historic objects to be mapped,
thereby cluttering the map.  But are there really that many people
that would clamor for feature type "x" to also be included?  I've not
heard anything on this mailing list from anyone advocating
passionately for any other type of historic feature.

One thing that differentiates abandoned railroads from other features
is that they are few enough in number compared to other features that
they don't add that many more elements to the map.  All things
considered, I wouldn't think that keeping abandoned railroads in OSM
would cause that much harm.  We cater to cyclists (of which I am one
as well), why not railway enthusiasts?

Mark Bradley