Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 20

Hi taggers, Colins question are there more countries with different speed rules on tracks ? Yes all the TGV like tracks in Europe through, France, Germany and Netherlands are specially build for TGVs but somewhere there still tracks combined, limited speed up to 100 miles / hr. Hendrik

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

I've copied the info to a new passenger_lines tag, since it would appear that some people would prefer to use the tracks tag for a different purpose. For those of you who don't have experience of train operations, I can assure you that the number of tracks available for passenger operations (and i

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On 2012-08-08 18:46,  Dave F. wrote : The discussion has gone off on a tangent (as it always seems to do :) ). Back to the original point - Are we agreed that tracks=4 on each individual way to indicate the total number of tracks running side by side is wrong

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Dave F. wrote: > Are we agreed that tracks=4 on each individual > way to indicate the total number of tracks running side by side is wrong? I think it's wrong (I think tracks=n on a way indicates how many tracks that way represents). __John _

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On 08/08/2012 17:28, Paul Johnson wrote: Yes, but it's still a goofy way to tag things. Here's an example in the US of two railways owned by two different companies operating in the same right of way: http://osm.org/go/WIDwpip0E- Yes, the operator tag is appropriate for that example. The d

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

While we're at it, what's traffic=fast on a rail line? What other values could there be? Weren't we using service=* for this kind of thing? Colin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Dave F. wrote: > On 08/08/2012 16:41, Pieren wrote: >> >> The relation would say "these 4 tracks belong to the same railway". > > I still don't see the point/benefit of this. >From a cartographic point of view this could greatly ease the ability to simplify/genera

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Dave F. wrote: > On 08/08/2012 16:41, Pieren wrote: > >> >> The relation would say "these 4 tracks belong to the same railway". >> > > I still don't see the point/benefit of this. In the quasi-nationalised UK > rail system all tracks across the country are owned to

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On 08/08/2012 16:41, Pieren wrote: The relation would say "these 4 tracks belong to the same railway". I still don't see the point/benefit of this. In the quasi-nationalised UK rail system all tracks across the country are owned to the same company & different journeys/operators are tagged wi

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Dave F. wrote: > Richard/Pieren > I'm failing to see what tracks=4 needs to be kept, especially in a relation. > I don't see the point of making a 'collection' of tracks. > Especially in relations as they're not meant to be used for > collections/categories. The re

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On 08/08/2012 13:14, Pieren wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Richard Mann > wrote: Maybe I'd better just copy all the info in tracks=* into a new tag, and let Dave set them all to tracks=1. Instead of creating a new tag duplicating the

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

It feels more like a collection rather than a geospatial relation to me, and (pace the conversation about refs on highways), it seems simpler to put the info directly on the relevant ways, rather than making the ways a member of a relation where the info is stored. In general, I think slow-changin

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Richard Mann < richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Maybe I'd better just copy all the info in tracks=* into a new tag, and > let Dave set them all to tracks=1. > > > Instead of creating a new tag duplicating the information, you could also create a relatio

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

I think we're rapidly heading to mapping each track separately. They can all be labelled as tracks=1 (though the wiki doesn't actually tell you to do that), but that would be completely pointless. It might have some value in the interim period, but the tag isn't used consistently enough to make tha