Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
John F. Eldredge writes: Note that there is a long tradition of encyclopedias, maps, and other copyrighted sources deliberately including some bogus facts as a way of detecting plagiarism. These bogus facts don't exist in real life, only in the copyrighted document, so having them show up in a competing document proves that copying took place. Yes, and if you use a map properly, you find this: From http://russnelson.com/#network : Rob Logan found a wonderful poster entitled New York State Railroad Network. It was published by Frank E. Richards, Phoenix, New York, and copyrighted 1958 (fair use claimed). Prepared by R. J. Rayback, and drawn by J. A. Peterson. I did a five-part scan of it and stitched it together badly (yuck). Still, it's better than nothing. There's a small one (1333x1200, small is relative) and a very large one (x6000 pixels, 3MB). Mapmakers traditionally insert a small discrepency into their maps so they can detect derivative works. I believe that I've found an error which is likely their inserted discrepency. They claim that there is a railroad heading east from Pavilion, NY. It would have to cross an impossibly steep hill, and I can't find it on either topographic maps or aerial photos. I contacted Virginia Rigoni, Town of Pavilion Historian on 11/13/2005 and she assures me that the only railroad in the town of Pavilion is the well-known north/south BO line. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Note that there is a long tradition of encyclopedias, maps, and other copyrighted sources deliberately including some bogus facts as a way of detecting plagiarism. These bogus facts don't exist in real life, only in the copyrighted document, so having them show up in a competing document proves that copying took place. On April 2, 2015 5:12:57 PM CDT, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: Am 02.04.2015 um 05:20 schrieb Russ Nelson: ... April Fools! Yes, you can. There are many kinds of public domain maps whose republication needs no license. For example, in the US all maps published before the magic date, whatever year it is we're up to now. Maps copyrighted but not renewed. Maps published without a copyright before 1988. Very true. Maps with insufficient creative content to be copyrightable. They may exist, but are you seriously saying that we (as in individual mappers and the OSM community as a whole) should make that determination? There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. While is true that you can't own a fact in isolation, the problem is they are rarely presented in that form. Up to now OSM has drawn the line in such a way that stuff that is signposted and is observable on the ground is fair game (with some exceptions, I believe the GR issue is still unsolved). If you are using a collection of facts, be it a list, a map, a file on a computer or whatever, we have to now always taken the, fairly high ground, position that you either need explicit permission (by agreement, licence or similar) or that the use of the source is clearly not subject to copyright any longer. Forgetting about other rights, regulations etc that may exist for the purpose of this discussion. What you seem to be saying in your above statement, followed by stevea's battle call to actually do so, that wholesale extraction of facts from any source is unproblematic and is something that can be done without further consideration and the net result can be used in OSM globally with no expectation of problems. BTW you live in the country of software patents which -is- essentially patenting math. Alas I suspect you are kidding yourself in a big way. Simon ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Russ Nelson writes: There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. I take this brief opportunity to encourage OSM volunteers who wish to better named rail subdivisions in the USA that these data are out there. These are indeed facts about the world and just because it seems as though they are locked up in private hands (a rail company or protected by copyright on a particular map) does NOT mean that such facts about the world cannot be put into OSM. THEY CAN! Of course, I adhere to don't copy from other maps but I explicitly agree with OSM's maxim to be bold entering data when they are clearly facts about the world. We have the ability to discern this, and we should. Railways are big, long, industrial things that snake hundreds and thousands of kilometers through our landscapes. Chunks of them have names, just as you would expect anything else hundreds of kilometers long to have names. They are regulated by many levels of governmental agencies, whose job it is (partly) is to keep track of these names. Go get 'em, and go put 'em in OSM. Thanks to all who do. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Simon Poole writes: Am 02.04.2015 um 05:20 schrieb Russ Nelson: Maps with insufficient creative content to be copyrightable. They may exist, but are you seriously saying that we (as in individual mappers and the OSM community as a whole) should make that determination? No, that would be up to a judge, and if you're talking to a judge, you're already losing even if you're winning. No, my point was to make the caution less absolute. There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. While is true that you can't own a fact in isolation, the problem is they are rarely presented in that form. I'll bet if you called up the railroad's public relations office and said What do you call the line between towns X and Y?, they would be happy to tell you. There seems to be a certain amount of anal retentiveness around copyright, as if it is absolute protection without restriction. What you seem to be saying in your above statement, followed by stevea's battle call to actually do so, that wholesale extraction of facts from any source is unproblematic I'm sorry if you think I said that. A typical railroad system map will name two, three, ten or twenty lines. Said line names will be uncreative and derivative (e.g. the line that runs through my town goes up to the St. Lawrence River and is called the St. Lawrence Subdivision). Now, copying railroad logos to use as shields?? Absolutely not. Belt and suspender lawyers will have advised their railroad customers to claim their logos as both copyrighted works AND trademarks. Some railroads are well-known to object to (say) their logo appearing on a model railroad car. You could use the trademark without pause as a shield, but I wouldn't advise using the logo on a shield without permission. Balance is needed, and I saw absolutely no balance in the posting I was replying to. BTW you live in the country of software patents which -is- essentially patenting math. BTW, you can't patent math. Seriously. Precedents out the wazoo. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Am 02.04.2015 um 05:20 schrieb Russ Nelson: ... April Fools! Yes, you can. There are many kinds of public domain maps whose republication needs no license. For example, in the US all maps published before the magic date, whatever year it is we're up to now. Maps copyrighted but not renewed. Maps published without a copyright before 1988. Very true. Maps with insufficient creative content to be copyrightable. They may exist, but are you seriously saying that we (as in individual mappers and the OSM community as a whole) should make that determination? There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. While is true that you can't own a fact in isolation, the problem is they are rarely presented in that form. Up to now OSM has drawn the line in such a way that stuff that is signposted and is observable on the ground is fair game (with some exceptions, I believe the GR issue is still unsolved). If you are using a collection of facts, be it a list, a map, a file on a computer or whatever, we have to now always taken the, fairly high ground, position that you either need explicit permission (by agreement, licence or similar) or that the use of the source is clearly not subject to copyright any longer. Forgetting about other rights, regulations etc that may exist for the purpose of this discussion. What you seem to be saying in your above statement, followed by stevea's battle call to actually do so, that wholesale extraction of facts from any source is unproblematic and is something that can be done without further consideration and the net result can be used in OSM globally with no expectation of problems. BTW you live in the country of software patents which -is- essentially patenting math. Alas I suspect you are kidding yourself in a big way. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Hi everybody! Let's tone down this thread a bit and bring it back on topic. Thanks! Ian ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Paul Norman writes: Without some kind of license giving permission, you cannot use other maps with OSM. April Fools! Yes, you can. There are many kinds of public domain maps whose republication needs no license. For example, in the US all maps published before the magic date, whatever year it is we're up to now. Maps copyrighted but not renewed. Maps published without a copyright before 1988. Maps with insufficient creative content to be copyrightable. There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Hi SteveA, I see that you have summarized the a lot of the same information from your email on the United States Railways wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States_railways Looking through Paul's comments and yours, I don't see any specific information about exactly how one would go about identifying specific railways in Oregon so that they could be added to relations. For the railways, Paul may be objecting to the content of the name and ref tag on the Way objects themselves for the railway. However, it is not clear how to find out what the name actually should be. The wiki page does indicate that the name tag on the Way objects should match the name tag on the Relation object with type=route and route=railway tags. For many rails around Portland, these Relations (type=route, route=railway) have not yet been created. You mention 2 specific examples (type=route; route=railway): Brooklyn Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588) and Fallbridge Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651). Some of the Way objects in Fallbridge Subdivision are also contained in http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792. Both of the relations for Fallbridge Subdivision have FIXME tags expressing uncertainty about exactly where the route Relation should begin and end. How would one determine the exact end of the Relation for the Fallbridge Subdivision? Also, looking through the history of the above relations, I can't really find anything in the changeset tags regarding the source of the data about the railroads. Where do the names Brooklyn Subdivision and Fallbridge Subdivision come from? Paul mentions that we should be using the name Banfield Mainline but where does that name come from and what exactly does it refer to? Are there signs on the ground with these things? Peter On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:18 AM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: Hello Peter: The California/Rail wiki page you describe documents a couple of different ways we tag rail. OpenRailwayMap (ORM) documents a three tier (route=tracks, route=railway, route=train) method used in parts of Germany. As that page (as well as the USA Rail WikiProject) explain(s), because of the way TIGER entered rail in the USA, (and the way we structure and name rail) we often use just two of these, skipping route=tracks relations and jumping right to putting named rail into relations of route=railway: rail infrastructure. You might say that two ORM/German-style lower and middle level relations have been merged into a single middle level relation here in the USA. There are also (higher level, and the whole OSM world agrees) passenger rail relations: route=train (or route=light_rail, route=subway, route=tram...effectively at the same logical level as route=train). That's OSM rail structure in a nutshell. In Oregon, there are the Brooklyn Subdivision ( http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588), the Fallbridge Subdivision ( http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651)... these are (correctly) the middle-level infrastructure relations tagged route=railway. There are also (predictably, also, the higher-level) route=train passenger rail relations like Amtrak Cascades (http://www.osm.org/relation/71428) which are often made up of a group of Subdivisions (route=railway relations) like Brooklyn and parts of Fallbridge. THIS is what Paul was typing about in those Notes. Specifically, a (higher-level/passenger) route=train relation should not have as its name=* tag the name of the system (like MAX, BART, Metro or Amtrak), it should be the name of the passenger line (Green Line, Downtown to University...). And, the underlying (lower-level infrastructure) route=railway relation should be correctly named as the rail company (or public works department, transit district...) names it: often something like XYZ Subdivision or ABC Industrial Line. OSM's Transport Layer is handy to display (rather raw) railway=* and (at closer zoom levels) route=bus. ORM is handy to display rail infrastructure (with Infrastructure radio button selected), especially usage=* tags. OpenPublicTransportMap (http://openptmap.org) is handy to display passenger rail relations. The USA is largely under construction for all of these, but we've come a long way. It's all in those wikis. Makes sense? Regards, SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Paul, I did notice that map seemed to be free of copyright and said so on list. I very much appreciate this reminder: don't other-map into OSM. True. Like I said, be careful. That goes for me, too. Good thing I was, and generally am. Regards, Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Nathan P writes: Keep me updated from Washington State. I work for a Railroad. Nathan, I believe a worthy method to keep updated is via a statewide wiki. I am an active (obsessive?!) contributor to the California/Railroads wiki, and there is also a Montana/Railroads wiki (not touched in about 2.5 years), but that's it as far as state-level rail wikis go. We can do better. It looks like you've been doing yeoman work on this in the greater Pacific Northwest, and I salute you. How about new state Railroad wikis in Oregon (Peter), Washington (Andrew?), and maybe New York (Russ)? It's a lot to ask, but a good wiki is an awesome resource. BTW, our Amtrak page [1] and routes have both enjoyed some really super improvement over the last few days. I anxiously await the next major rendering of OPTM [2] which will display passenger rail in the USA like never before. Maybe by April 2nd or 3rd? Regards, SteveA California [1] http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Amtrak [2] http://openptmap.org/?zoom=5lat=38lon=-98layers=BTFFT ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Peter Dobratz writes: I don't see any specific information about exactly how one would go about identifying specific railways in Oregon so that they could be added to relations. Yes, Peter: I did that on purpose because I want to encourage OSM mappers to develop their own methods for discovering the names of rail subdivisions. One way I did this in California was to use our state's Public Utilities Commission (PUCs are state agencies that regulate railroads and other public utilities) Road/Rail Crossing Spreadsheet. Oregon's PUC likely has something similar (as should all other states). It shows all Road/Rail crossings in the state, along with the name of the subdivision/rail line. If you sort the sheet by the subdivision/line name, then milepost, you can essentially trace the rail line along known (already in OSM) streets/avenues/boulevards. This allows you to reverse engineer the name of an existing (TIGER-entered, poorly named) rail line in OSM as you can identify it by known landmarks (streets). Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Are there signs on the ground with these things? No, there are usually not. Occasionally you will see a sign that says something like Entering Seabright Block but these are often traffic signalling areas, not entire subdivisions which are usually long -- hundreds of km -- stretches of contiguous rail. However, this doesn't mean that they are unnamed, just poorly signed. Rail companies name them internally, but because rail companies are regulated, they report these names to PUCs, and therefore give them to the public. It's just that the data can be difficult to discern. Persevere! For the railways, Paul may be objecting to the content of the name and ref tag on the Way objects themselves for the railway. However, it is not clear how to find out what the name actually should be. The wiki page does indicate that the name tag on the Way objects should match the name tag on the Relation object with type=route and route=railway tags. For many rails around Portland, these Relations (type=route, route=railway) have not yet been created. Yup. So: 1) Discover the correct names for rail infrastructure segments, 2) Tag them as such (usually the existing TIGER name= correctly can become the operator= tag), 3) Give them a usage= tag and 4) Collect into a route=railway relation identically named rail segments. That is the important work that has been underway in California (and many other states) for the past several months. Especially if usage= tags are also applied to rail segments, ORM will display these with a pleasing contiguous line. Yes, usage= tags can be a bit nebulous to determine, too, just do your best using these [2] guidelines. You mention 2 specific examples (type=route; route=railway): Brooklyn Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588) and Fallbridge Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651). Some of the Way objects in Fallbridge Subdivision are also contained in http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792. Both of the relations for Fallbridge Subdivision have FIXME tags expressing uncertainty about exactly where the route Relation should begin and end. How would one determine the exact end of the Relation for the Fallbridge Subdivision? It looks like I made an error by adding 4734792, as I didn't see the existing 1443651. I believe this is a forgivable mistake, and I'm sorry I made it. I will remove 4734792 forthwith. Regarding how to determine where the exact boundaries are: I can't give you a perfect answer in every case. Often, subdivisions begin and end at a yard, a junction or a station, but not always. The rail owner gets to say definitively, and again, the PUC should document this (somewhere). Also, looking through the history of the above relations, I can't really find anything in the changeset tags regarding the source of the data about the railroads. Where do the names Brooklyn Subdivision and Fallbridge Subdivision come from? The names come from the rail company/owner of the line. Especially for rail with passenger routes, this will
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
On 3/31/2015 11:02 AM, stevea wrote: Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Without some kind of license giving permission, you cannot use other maps with OSM. The absence of a copyright notice has no impact on if something is protected by copyright* and I see nothing on the BNSF map to imply it is public domain. * With some exceptions, mainly around old works. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
On 3/31/15 4:58 PM, Paul Norman wrote: On 3/31/2015 11:02 AM, stevea wrote: Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Without some kind of license giving permission, you cannot use other maps with OSM. The absence of a copyright notice has no impact on if something is protected by copyright* and I see nothing on the BNSF map to imply it is public domain. * With some exceptions, mainly around old works. the specific break point for the US is March 1st 1989, when the US finally joined the Berne Convention. before this, explicit copyright notices were required in the US; afterwards US copyright law became much more consistent with international norms and all works are under copyright whether there is notice or not. the Berne convention dates from 1886, but the original list of signatories was fairly small. now, membership in the WTO requires that countries adapt nearly all provisions of the convention. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Keep me updated from Washington State. I work for a Railroad. Nathan P email: natf...@gmail.com On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: stevea writes: I have run into devotees of old_railway_operator=* and respect the tag by leaving it be where I encounter it, though I don't go out of my way to add it unless I have absolute positive knowledge of it (rarely to never). Yeah, it's an NE2 thing which he added automatically by changing the name of abandoned railroads to old_railway_operator. He's technically correct because the branch of a railroad, the name it goes by, is often not the name of the company who operated it. The line that goes south of Lake Ontario in NY was called the Hojack, but was operated by New York Central. It would be nice if map renderers, when presented with an abandoned railroad that has no name, rather than follow the USGS practice of saying Abandoned Railroad Bed, would look for name= first, old_railway_operator= second, and only if those two are absent, rendered the railway as a dotted line labeled Abandoned Railroad Bed just like the USGS does. In California, rail is approximately early alpha. For the USA as a whole, I'd say rail is even before that, in an early development phase. New York rail is 99% done. I say 97% because I need to hit some railroad yards in Buffalo still. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
stevea writes: I have run into devotees of old_railway_operator=* and respect the tag by leaving it be where I encounter it, though I don't go out of my way to add it unless I have absolute positive knowledge of it (rarely to never). Yeah, it's an NE2 thing which he added automatically by changing the name of abandoned railroads to old_railway_operator. He's technically correct because the branch of a railroad, the name it goes by, is often not the name of the company who operated it. The line that goes south of Lake Ontario in NY was called the Hojack, but was operated by New York Central. It would be nice if map renderers, when presented with an abandoned railroad that has no name, rather than follow the USGS practice of saying Abandoned Railroad Bed, would look for name= first, old_railway_operator= second, and only if those two are absent, rendered the railway as a dotted line labeled Abandoned Railroad Bed just like the USGS does. In California, rail is approximately early alpha. For the USA as a whole, I'd say rail is even before that, in an early development phase. New York rail is 99% done. I say 97% because I need to hit some railroad yards in Buffalo still. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Hello Peter: The California/Rail wiki page you describe documents a couple of different ways we tag rail. OpenRailwayMap (ORM) documents a three tier (route=tracks, route=railway, route=train) method used in parts of Germany. As that page (as well as the USA Rail WikiProject) explain(s), because of the way TIGER entered rail in the USA, (and the way we structure and name rail) we often use just two of these, skipping route=tracks relations and jumping right to putting named rail into relations of route=railway: rail infrastructure. You might say that two ORM/German-style lower and middle level relations have been merged into a single middle level relation here in the USA. There are also (higher level, and the whole OSM world agrees) passenger rail relations: route=train (or route=light_rail, route=subway, route=tram...effectively at the same logical level as route=train). That's OSM rail structure in a nutshell. In Oregon, there are the Brooklyn Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588), the Fallbridge Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651)... these are (correctly) the middle-level infrastructure relations tagged route=railway. There are also (predictably, also, the higher-level) route=train passenger rail relations like Amtrak Cascades (http://www.osm.org/relation/71428) which are often made up of a group of Subdivisions (route=railway relations) like Brooklyn and parts of Fallbridge. THIS is what Paul was typing about in those Notes. Specifically, a (higher-level/passenger) route=train relation should not have as its name=* tag the name of the system (like MAX, BART, Metro or Amtrak), it should be the name of the passenger line (Green Line, Downtown to University...). And, the underlying (lower-level infrastructure) route=railway relation should be correctly named as the rail company (or public works department, transit district...) names it: often something like XYZ Subdivision or ABC Industrial Line. OSM's Transport Layer is handy to display (rather raw) railway=* and (at closer zoom levels) route=bus. ORM is handy to display rail infrastructure (with Infrastructure radio button selected), especially usage=* tags. OpenPublicTransportMap (http://openptmap.org) is handy to display passenger rail relations. The USA is largely under construction for all of these, but we've come a long way. It's all in those wikis. Makes sense? Regards, SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Portland also needs help. Seems whenever the map gets fixed, someone goes through and stomps the name back to something incorrect like Metropolitan Area Express or Portland Streetcar instead of the subdivision name, and pull things like putting the line of the service running on the tracks as ref=*. God help you if you actually try to point it out, Grant Humphries or Peter Dobratz will get bitchy about it... For those following along from home, please see the following note in Portland, Oregon: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/335545 As you can see, I closed out this note (twice). The issues in this note are too vague and refers to the whole Portland metropolitan area. Also, the actual area where this note is located is a new section of track which is not scheduled to be operational until September 2015. There are a bunch of things in this immediate area with construction or proposed tags since the area is still very much in flux. There was a similar situation which I resolved a few months ago. Paul put some OSM notes in downtown Portland saying he objects to the use of oneway=yes tags on OSM Ways for Portland area light rail and street car lines. I looked into the history and determined that there were a few cases where Grant Humphries had added the oneway=yes tag and Paul had came back later and removed the oneway=yes tag, only to have Grant Humphries add the oneway=yes tag in a subsequent edit. I sent OSM private messages to both Grant and Paul in December. Paul never responded to my OSM private message on this subject. However, I did have a productive conversation with Grant. Grant was not even aware that he had been undoing some of Paul's edits. In any case, we came to the agreement that oneway=yes does not make sense for Portland area railways and I removed the tag as part of my effort to update the route relations to use the new route_master format with a separate route relation for each direction of travel. For what it's worth, there are actually signs on the ground that tell pedestrians to look both ways before crossing these train tracks and the new route relations implicitly include the standard direction of travel along the railway because the rail segments are added to the relation in the other they are traversed. However, in the case of the above note, I can't discern exactly which tags Paul is objecting to, nor can I find any specific information on the OSM wiki about exactly what should be in the name tag on railways. In the note, Paul says It's not rocket surgery to create the relations and have things named like Banfield Mainline like it's supposed to be instead of Metropolitan Area Express, which is wrong. I have no idea what Paul is talking about here. The phrase Banfield Mainline does not occur in the OSM wiki, and I can't find anything on the internet to indicate exactly what tracks would be best referred to as the Bainfield Mainline. I moved to Portland about 9 months ago, I often hear these tracks colloquially referred to as the MAX, which is an acronym for Metropolitan Area Express. Or maybe MAX just refers to the name of the trains that run on those tracks. I do not have any objections to updates to Portland area railways to be more correct/complete and/or consistent with the work SteveA is doing in California. For anyone doing these edits, it would be helpful to check the OSM history on the affected Ways and communicate with anyone who has also changed the tags that you would be changing. Maybe even start with an Oregon equivalent of the http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads wiki page. A bunch of the route relations for the Portland area are already linked from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portland,_Oregon. Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Speaking of rail mapping: I noticed something that could use some attention. The key old_railway_operator=* is used ~90K times, but almost entirely in the US. [1] It has a *really* minimal wiki page. [2] And I don't see it mentioned on the main Railways page [3] or the US Railways project page [4]. (though I did see it on the California Railroads page you linked to) At minimum, I'm thinking some additional documentation would be good. Also wondering if the US OSM rail community is doing things differently from the rest of the world? Or maybe the rest of the world is still using their railroads! :) Thanks, Brad [1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_railway_operator [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aold_railway_operator [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railways [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/Railways On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:56 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads now documents an early alpha state of OSM rail in California. Especially if you are a railfan in California, please have a look. Or, if you are a rail enthusiast in another state, and want a template with which to jump-start better OSM rail completion in your neck of the woods, please copy what you might from this wiki. It is a little bit stubby (some missing elements in the tables...) but it should provide a good launch pad for either a California railfan or an OSM mapper who wants to ignite a similar venture in another state. As is true of so many things OSM: there remains much more to do, but look what we've already done! http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=37lon=-96zoom= 5style=standard Regards and happy mapping (whether rail or another sort), SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Speaking of rail mapping: I noticed something that could use some attention. The key old_railway_operator=* is used ~90K times, but almost entirely in the US. [1] It has a *really* minimal wiki page. [2] And I don't see it mentioned on the main Railways page [3] or the US Railways project page [4]. (though I did see it on the California Railroads page you linked to) At minimum, I'm thinking some additional documentation would be good. Also wondering if the US OSM rail community is doing things differently from the rest of the world? Or maybe the rest of the world is still using their railroads! :) Thanks, Brad Hi Brad: I have run into devotees of old_railway_operator=* and respect the tag by leaving it be where I encounter it, though I don't go out of my way to add it unless I have absolute positive knowledge of it (rarely to never). Along with other things historic it can ignite passion and arguments, yes. Suffice to say that it is important to the not-altogether-exclusively-USA concept of trackage rights which are sometimes complex leasing arrangements by rail owners and operators to allow mixes of freight and passenger services on given sets of rail infrastructure. The good news is that in the USA, the Surface Transportation Board makes all such trackage rights a matter of public record, so with some (tedious) work, we COULD properly tag all rail in the USA with a set of tags to reflect these complexities. However, it would be a lengthy, detailed task. This would, of course, begin with good documentation to do so, which you point out doesn't seem to exist. Precluding this, of course, is an OSM wiki volunteer with this knowledge (or can get it) who is also willing to brain-dump/channel it into proper wiki form. We might have that, we might not. I agree with you that it is a good call to make this more widely known -- there is LOTS in OSM that could use some attention. In California, rail is approximately early alpha. For the USA as a whole, I'd say rail is even before that, in an early development phase. It is rapidly getting better (over months/years, not days/weeks). Discussing (first) and then doing something about old_railway_operator=* (among other things) are going to chip away at even more improvement. That's just how it works. For example (perhaps I open a can of worms), our WikiProject United States railways says that for the most part, North American rail infrastructure has completely skipped route=tracks relations as documented in OpenRailwayMap, jumping right to route=railway relations. This might be OK, or it might not, as I have no idea what ramifications this might have on renderers or routing engines (if any). OK, we document it, and that's good. But...? Again, calling out to that intersection of OSMers and knowledgeable USA rail folks! We can untangle any mess or improve any lack of data in our map if we wish, but we must have excellent real world knowledge. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:56:29PM -0700, stevea wrote: Especially if you are a railfan in California, please have a look. Or, if you are a rail enthusiast in another state, and want a template with which to jump-start better OSM rail completion in your neck of the woods, please copy what you might from this wiki. It is a little bit stubby (some missing elements in the tables...) but it should provide a good launch pad for either a California railfan or an OSM mapper who wants to ignite a similar venture in another state. Wow, this is starting to look good. I mapped the tracks around Eastern North Carolina but there is still much to do. I wonder if anyone has any information on Norfolk Southern or CSXT lines in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland that I could use to help determine main lines versus branch lines. - --Eric -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVCiJDAAoJED4nr8JXHVrFzQwIALu0pIPA1E6vgqOQMv4JqjFj SBYR4xcwWiwMtLXl76/0B0+/Xf6TMpTkCSvNNU+BY/ics/bxdUO2nBLQXQHM1M5N lpD3iRsmoEU6KhiDS27s4jBVAv9+Efy4PkBKBzpaFGEadk39zL4R1BW7rufeKQdh 8a/XMHc6GnQZjFKZDCt5QVBOjbxPK8CW9cEdC8If9/sfiN+HAA2uxFH8O8b3JmgE yN45VSgUZPbQZIknI4DCJ0SHulunVQEatgpf42KronJfNhTsDGUUfyP7dZGvH+kr dUyC245RL04Uj3g76SuA1xgTyvWw3fnCYrk718Mb8hMQ2WVQrOao8kBCtNF5QTk= =Fg/F -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads now documents an early alpha state of OSM rail in California. Especially if you are a railfan in California, please have a look. Or, if you are a rail enthusiast in another state, and want a template with which to jump-start better OSM rail completion in your neck of the woods, please copy what you might from this wiki. It is a little bit stubby (some missing elements in the tables...) but it should provide a good launch pad for either a California railfan or an OSM mapper who wants to ignite a similar venture in another state. As is true of so many things OSM: there remains much more to do, but look what we've already done! http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=37lon=-96zoom=5style=standard Regards and happy mapping (whether rail or another sort), SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
