Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Hi Matt, It seems we've reached the point of simply restating our views. I don't think yours represents consensus - but please discuss it on the main OSM talk list if you want. Steve On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Abandoned makes it sounds like there are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains running on it. But that's not the case - in the 4km the line used to run on there are 11 remaining artifacts, the largest being a station building (old North Carlton station), the smallest being a single 4 metre track section in Edinburgh gardens, or the one remaining concrete pylon base. They are the vestigial traces that need to be mapped. As for the rest, it's a mostly a park now with a bike track along it (the bits that aren't are houses) ... and that's what it should be mapped as. On 30/11/2012 6:23 PM, Mark Rennick wrote: Matt ** ** I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. ** ** If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear park. ** ** *From:* Matt White [mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au mattwh...@iinet.com.au] *Sent:* Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM *To:* 'talk-au' *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines ** ** Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn’t historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it’s mapping the present. *From:* Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ** ** ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Abandoned makes it sounds like there are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains running on it. Is ruined a tag? nick *** WARNING: This email (including any attachments) may contain legally privileged, confidential or private information and may be protected by copyright. You may only use it if you are the person(s) it was intended to be sent to and if you use it in an authorised way. No one is allowed to use, review, alter, transmit, disclose, distribute, print or copy this email without appropriate authority. If this email was not intended for you and was sent to you by mistake, please telephone or email me immediately, destroy any hardcopies of this email and delete it and any copies of it from your computer system. Any right which the sender may have under copyright law, and any legal privilege and confidentiality attached to this email is not waived or destroyed by that mistake. It is your responsibility to ensure that this email does not contain and is not affected by computer viruses, defects or interference by third parties or replication problems (including incompatibility with your computer system). Opinions contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, or endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure. *** ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Abandoned makes it sounds like there are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains running on it. But that's not the case - in the 4km the line used to run on there are 11 remaining artifacts, the largest being a station building (old North Carlton station), the smallest being a single 4 metre track section in Edinburgh gardens, or the one remaining concrete pylon base. They are the vestigial traces that need to be mapped. As for the rest, it's a mostly a park now with a bike track along it (the bits that aren't are houses) ... and that's what it should be mapped as. On 30/11/2012 6:23 PM, Mark Rennick wrote: Matt I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear park. *From:*Matt White [mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au] *Sent:* Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM *To:* 'talk-au' *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. *From:*Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. *From:*Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? Not me. If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Your line of reasoning basically goes we will only map individual historical artefacts that are each worth mapping. The reason (IMHO) that we map a train line like railway=abandoned is to connect lots of little artefacts and landscape features that individually are too trivial to map. For example, a slight embankment (normally not something we'd map), in the context of other abandoned rail features makes sense under a railway=abandoned. Similarly, a line of trees, or simply the absence of development. Frequently, the corridors in which abandoned rail lines lie are still owned by the state. Mapping the railway line makes sense, and is meaningful to many people: Our house is on Station St, just the other side of the old rail line - even if strictly speaking there is nothing on the ground. I have no objections to removing sections that have been built over. So maybe my position is: If the former rail line still plays a part as a landmark or in planning and development, it should be mapped. Similarly, I'm ok with removing former stations that have completely gone and been built over, but if their former presence is preserved in some way, they should be mapped. It seems we both agree on mapping *the present* but differ in how to interpret that. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Matt I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear park. From: Matt White [mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au] Sent: Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM To: 'talk-au' Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. From: Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM To: Matt White Cc: talk-au Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. From: Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM To: Matt White Cc: talk-au Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park Ditto with historical names. Piera St in East Brunswick was originally named Nicholas St, and Jenkin St was Baden St in 1936. No idea why they were changed - confusion with other more major streets nearby I guess - but there is no sign of the old name on the ground. Yeah - I know there is a fixed historical name tag I can set, but even then I wonder about it. It's not like anyone in the street ever called it that (which is possibly different to something like Whitehorse Road in Nunawading, which I think is technically now Maroondah Highway, but Whitehorse is the historical name that is still in use) What we really need is a better storage model - the simple one we use just isn't up to the task for this kind of data. It barely copes with teh actual on-the-ground info as it is. Remember segments, anyone? Matt On 26/11/2012 1:38 PM, Paul Norman wrote: From: Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On 26/11/2012 10:38 AM, mick wrote: I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? The subject of historical rail lines and historical roads came up on the talk-us@ mailing list relatively recently. As always, there were multiple views. The result of the discussion was that the general view is that historic information only belongs in OSM when there is some trace on the ground. As a practical matter, historic roads are not generally mapped in OSM. Whenever a road is physically realigned and the new alignment mapped in OSM the old alignment is not saved as a separate way. If I survey the area I only look at how it looks now so I don't know if the old alignment in the database is because it was aligned that way in the past or because the data was inaccurate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Hi Matt, The question about mapping old, historical features is much wider than just the Australian context. I'm pretty sure the current consensus is that we old rail lines should be mapped - even if there is not much to see on the ground. There might be more than you think - there's a station building (now a community hall, I think), other things too, perhaps. There are probably other former railways about with much less to see (the Rosstown Railway comes to mind) - at least with this one there are physical remnants such as tracks. So, yes, I object. Feel free to raise the issue on the main OSM talk list though. Steve On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?** lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887**zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt __**_ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-auhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Hi, I'm pretty sure we've reached consensus in the past that if there is absolutely no evidence of it on the ground - no tunnels - no cuttings - no tracks. In other words there was a railway line, but now it is a shopping mall, then it doesn't get mapped. We don't maintain layers of history in OSM right now. If there is evidence still on the ground, then we have tags for that. What is the source for the data that is there, if there is no evidence on the ground? Where was it copied from? Ian. On 25 November 2012 17:15, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?** lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887**zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt __**_ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-auhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Not sure of the original source - the rail line is in old Melways etc. and in some out of copy right maps I have. The existence of the inner circle rail line isn't really a secret. The problem for me is that it just isn't there any more (aside from the handful of things I mentioned below, which I agree can be kept mapped correctly because they exist physically, but it amounts to above 100 metres of track in a dozen small sections, plus a cutting underneath Royak parade and an old station building that is now a community centre). The actual align of the rail line is also out by about 30 meters at least - it's too far south on OSM to be accurate Just because is existed once in a time past doesn't mean we should map it. Parts of the Deepdene rail spur still exist (some cuttings and the like), but there's no rails, and it has been mostly built over. Ditto the Rosstown railway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosstown_Railway (Elsternwick to Oakleigh) It's not a disused railway where the infrastucture is still there. It's a bike path, the lines have been pulled up, the stations torn down, the overhead gantry towers removed... It's just a slippery slope... immediately north of the rail line in the link below is Holden St. It used to have a tram line on it, with a curious little dogleg at the end onto St Georges Road. That was also 40 years ago. There's not much left now, but there are a few traces if you know what you are looking for (old overhead cable mounts etc). But I hardly think it needs to be mapped. Matt On 25/11/2012 9:28 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote: Hi, I'm pretty sure we've reached consensus in the past that if there is absolutely no evidence of it on the ground - no tunnels - no cuttings - no tracks. In other words there was a railway line, but now it is a shopping mall, then it doesn't get mapped. We don't maintain layers of history in OSM right now. If there is evidence still on the ground, then we have tags for that. What is the source for the data that is there, if there is no evidence on the ground? Where was it copied from? Ian. On 25 November 2012 17:15, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines (Ian Steer)
Surely OSM isn't in the business of producing historical maps? If so, where do you stop (ie how old) - do the Europeans map Roman roads ? It would be confusing for people trying to use the maps to see a railway line marked, with no physical evidence of its existence. Ian -Original Message- From: talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org] Sent: Sunday, 25 November 2012 7:24 PM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 28 Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to talk-au@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest... Today's Topics: 1. Historical rail lines (Matt White) 2. Re: Historical rail lines (Steve Bennett) 3. Re: Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach (Steve Bennett) 4. Re: Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach (David Bannon) 5. Re: Historical rail lines (Ian Sergeant) 6. Re: Historical rail lines (Matt White) -- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +1100 From: Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: [talk-au] Historical rail lines Message-ID: 50b1b79f.4000...@iinet.net.au Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt -- Message: 2 Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:29:00 +1100 From: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com To: Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines Message-ID: CA+z=q=ubdP81a1eLK9vSEc7pZxB7YHbH=7hfyvn-smk34wk...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi Matt, The question about mapping old, historical features is much wider than just the Australian context. I'm pretty sure the current consensus is that we old rail lines should be mapped - even if there is not much to see on the ground. There might be more than you think - there's a station building (now a community hall, I think), other things too, perhaps. There are probably other former railways about with much less to see (the Rosstown Railway comes to mind) - at least with this one there are physical remnants such as tracks. So, yes, I object. Feel free to raise the issue on the main OSM talk list though. Steve On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?** lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887**zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreet map.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt __**_ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-auhttp
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty sure we've reached consensus in the past that if there is absolutely no evidence of it on the ground - no tunnels - no cuttings - no tracks. In other words there was a railway line, but now it is a shopping mall, then it doesn't get mapped. We don't maintain layers of history in OSM right now. Here's what the wiki says: Abandoned - The track has been removed and the line may have been reused or left to decay but is still clearly visible, either from the replacement infrastructure, or purely from a line of trees around an original cutting or embankment. Use railwayhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:railway =abandoned https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dabandoned. Where it has been reused as a cycle path then add highwayhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway =cycleway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway For the case of the Inner Circle line, there is ample evidence: - some track, buildings etc - large sections of reserved land (according to our map, the Linear Park Reserve) - a bike path (the Inner Circle Rail Trail): https://www.railtrails.org.au/trail?view=trailid=133 I agree that where a rail line has been completely removed and sold off, and built over, the story is a bit different. But in this case, great effort has been expended to retain it as a feature of the landscape: hence the park, bike path, etc. Its presence lives on much more than some abstract representation on a map. It's completely plausible that people would want to follow the old train line on the map - in a way that wouldn't be the case if it had been built over by houses or shopping malls. There are other abandoned railways that perhaps shouldn't be mapped, but the case is pretty good for this one. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +1100 Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. BUT, by default, OSM has become a source for mappers doing more than mere street maps and the loss of historical data would be a serious setback. mick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +1100 Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. BUT, by default, OSM has become a source for mappers doing more than mere street maps and the loss of historical data would be a serious setback. mick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On 26/11/2012 10:38 AM, mick wrote: I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? Alex ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On 26 November 2012 12:36, Alex Sims a...@softgrow.com wrote: I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? I don't think so. Keeping historical data in OSM is going to require a more complex model. Maybe a separate project, maybe layers, maybe something else. There is a mailing list and a wiki page set up to gather ideas.. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/historic There are two main aspects to consider here. Firstly, how you map that what no longer exists? Secondly, how you track changes made to OSM, so you can capture history within the OSM changesets. The first one we have plenty of time. The second we need right now, every addition I make it is impossible to tell whether I'm adding a new feature that didn't exist on the ground before, or just filling in a feature that has always existed but wasn't mapped. And every feature I remove, it is impossible to tell if I'm removing it before it is wrong, or removing it because it has been demolished. So, we're actually losing information as we go. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
From: Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On 26/11/2012 10:38 AM, mick wrote: I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? The subject of historical rail lines and historical roads came up on the talk-us@ mailing list relatively recently. As always, there were multiple views. The result of the discussion was that the general view is that historic information only belongs in OSM when there is some trace on the ground. As a practical matter, historic roads are not generally mapped in OSM. Whenever a road is physically realigned and the new alignment mapped in OSM the old alignment is not saved as a separate way. If I survey the area I only look at how it looks now so I don't know if the old alignment in the database is because it was aligned that way in the past or because the data was inaccurate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:06:27 +1030 Alex Sims a...@softgrow.com wrote: On 26/11/2012 10:38 AM, mick wrote: I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? Alex I'd forgotten about virtual Objects like administrative boundaries. They are made visible by the objects and vectors that define them, eg. trees, buildings, hills, roads and watercourses. Yes, Boundaries are essential and underlying historical objects that illustrate their logical basis should be available, even if the are not rendered. mick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:18:30 +1100 Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 November 2012 12:36, Alex Sims a...@softgrow.com wrote: I don't think so. Keeping historical data in OSM is going to require a more complex model. Maybe a separate project, maybe layers, maybe something else. There is a mailing list and a wiki page set up to gather ideas.. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/historic Thanks for the heads-up on the historical list, somehow I missed its birth notice. There are two main aspects to consider here. Firstly, how you map that what no longer exists? Most of my mapping interests relate to historical mapping, English parishes, Civil and Church, for my family history. Studying the Roman occupation of Britain, etc. My usual methodology is to start with available, free to use, current maps; For UK OS Open Data, for Aust. Geoscience Australia TOPO250K series and for both OSM subsets; And clean them up. Next, grab what I can find of earlier maps, georeference and trace them and then pull them into shape, I always seem to got plenty of distortion. When the map layers are as clean as I can get them, I overlay them and copy the required details onto a fresh layer and work-up suitable tagging. Secondly, how you track changes made to OSM, so you can capture history within the OSM changesets. The first one we have plenty of time. The second we need right now, every addition I make it is impossible to tell whether I'm adding a new feature that didn't exist on the ground before, or just filling in a feature that has always existed but wasn't mapped. And every feature I remove, it is impossible to tell if I'm removing it before it is wrong, or removing it because it has been demolished. So, we're actually losing information as we go. I fear this can only be successfully done on the micro scale unless the tagging guidelines can be tightened. The free and easy approach to tagging makes outside the box application of the data a largely manual job. I'm sure this is far from insurmountable, I just can't get my head around it. mick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Historical rail lines
A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
