Re: [openrailwaymap] Is "deelectrified" really a good idea?

2016-10-10 Thread Denis Stein
Dear all, Am 08.10.2016 um 22:35 schrieb Alexander Matheisen: Am Freitag, den 07.10.2016, 13:07 +0200 schrieb Denis Stein: Similar topic, same issue: Can/Shall the lifecycle tagging scheme also be used for nodes? E.g., near Hamburg Hbf. a node [1] is currently tagged as follows:

Re: [openrailwaymap] Is "deelectrified" really a good idea?

2016-10-08 Thread Alexander Matheisen
Am Freitag, den 07.10.2016, 13:07 +0200 schrieb Denis Stein: > Similar topic, same issue: Can/Shall the lifecycle tagging scheme > also  > be used for nodes? > > E.g., near Hamburg Hbf. a node [1] is currently tagged as follows: > > > > > railway:disused=switch > > railway:local_operated=no > >

Re: [openrailwaymap] Is "deelectrified" really a good idea?

2016-10-07 Thread Denis Stein
Dear all, Am 26.09.2016 um 17:24 schrieb Michael Reichert: Active: railway=rail;*=* Removed: railway=abandoned;abandoned:railway=rail;abandoned:*=* abanoned:railway=* (aka lifecycle tagging scheme) competes with the tagging used for non-operational roads (e.g. highway=construction +