Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 02/25/12 01:23, Richard Welty wrote: > > how do you tag a never-completed railway which has significant > important > > landmark value in the current landscape? > > I think that what you are seeing is not a railway at all. > > I suggest to tag what you see on the ground, rather than whatever the > object was that people once planned to build. I don't see why there > should be a "railway=cut" when a layman would never know the the cut > he > observes was once meant to have a railway line. >
>From my firsthand experience, former railways (and presumably also unfinished >railways) tend to have some distinguishing features. In particular, they tend >to have a much shallower grade than roads made for other types of traffic, >since locomotives are not very good at climbing steep slopes. Also, you are >more likely to find single-track railways than single-lane roadways, so a >single-lane-width cut is likely a sign of a railway. Someone who only goes to >the trouble to build a single-lane road is not likely to bother with >excavating a cut, but instead will mostly make use of the natural contours. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
