Hi Garry,
On 2020-06-13 18:49, Garry Keenor wrote:
> Also, there are only 2 networks that I can identify worldwide that are 4th
> rail, and I've tagged them both already. :-)
You may have missed one I just discovered that the LIM lines of
SkyTrain (Vancouver) have some kind of 4-rail
Just to let you all know that I have changed the proposal to incorporate
the feedback to leave electrified=rail in place for 3rd rail.
best regards,
Garry
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
I think it is fairly unlikely that any more 4th rail will be built, and
certainly not converted. It is a system which makes it difficult to detect
earth faults, as well as making the design of junctions more complex. Not
impossible though.
best regards,
Garry
On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 12:22, Paul
On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 17:50, Garry Keenor wrote:
> Paul - thanks for the response. I struggle with the idea that someone
> would know that a route is electrified with a ground level contact system,
> but not how many rails there are. The possible sources are a) local
> knowledge,
>
Or
> there are only 2 networks that I can identify worldwide that are 4th
rail, and I've tagged them both already.
If that's the case, is it worth tagging the distinction between 3rd and 4th
rail systems?
If so, perhaps only the rare 4th rail systems need a new tag, and we can
keep electried=rail
On 2020-06-13 18:58, Garry Keenor wrote:
> Colin,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> I want to clear one very important thing up. The tag electrified=* is
> currently being used in OSM to define the *contact system* in use, not the
> power supply. All railway electrification systems require
Colin,
Thanks for your comments.
I want to clear one very important thing up. The tag electrified=* is
currently being used in OSM to define the *contact system* in use, not the
power supply. All railway electrification systems require a sliding
contact between train and infrastructure to
f the 3rd
> rail is mentioned, then the 1st and 2nd must be there (otherwise it
> wouldn't be 3rd rail) and, if the 4th rail is mentioned, then the 1st, 2nd
> and 3rd must also be there.
>
> Peter ;-)
>
> >Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:55:27 +0200
>
> >From: Colin Smal
Paul - thanks for the response. I struggle with the idea that someone would
know that a route is electrified with a ground level contact system, but
not how many rails there are. The possible sources are a) local knowledge,
b) wikipedia and c) aerial imagery. All of these will, 9 times out of 10,
> Using electrified=rail to mean 3 rails and having a sub-tag for 4 rails
is a bad
thing.
+1
Volker
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 2020-06-11 13:36, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 12:30, Peter Neale via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>> ...or (almost getting serious now) we could just assume that, if the 3rd
>> rail is mentioned, then the 1st and 2nd must be there (otherwise it wouldn't
>> be 3rd rail) and, if the
On 2020-06-11 13:28, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote:
> At the risk of being called pedantic, or frivolous, surely it should be,
> "1st+2nd+3rd+4th rail" (after all, it won't work without the 1st and 2nd
> rails)!
>
> ...or (almost getting serious now) we could just assume that, if the 3rd rail
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 08:57, Garry Keenor wrote:
>
> Re: using electrified=rail to mean (3rd or 4th rail)
> I'm not in favour of this one - railway electrification engineers (of
> which I am one) do not consider 4th rail to be a special case of 3rd rail,
> but rather a distinct system with its
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 12:30, Peter Neale via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> ...or (almost getting serious now) we could just assume that, if the 3rd
> rail is mentioned, then the 1st and 2nd must be there (otherwise it
> wouldn't be 3rd rail) and, if the 4th rail is mentioned,
(otherwise it wouldn't be 3rd
rail) and, if the 4th rail is mentioned, then the 1st, 2nd and 3rd must also be
there.
Peter ;-)
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:55:27 +0200
>From: Colin Smale
>To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - 3rd and 4th rail
>
Hi Garry, thanks for your reply. I am pleased to hear that the "related
issues" are already on the radar and I am more than happy to see them in
a following proposal.
One thought about 3rd_rail/4th_rail vs 3rail/4rail: The term "4th rail"
is actually semantically incorrect, and should really be
Michael,
Thanks for your comments. I'm a bit behind so I'll try to catch up with
your comments to date.
Re: 3rd_rail/4th_rail vs 3rail/4rail
I really don't mind and will go with the majority. Not sure how you
determine a majority with this process!
Re: using electrified=rail to mean (3rd or 4th
Colin,
Thanks for your comments. I'm a bit behind so I'll try to catch up with
your comments to date.
Re: 3rd_rail/4th_rail vs 3rail/4rail
I really don't mind and will go with the majority. Not sure how you
determine a majority with this process!
Re: keeping electrified=rail to mean 3rd rail
Thanks Paul - I messed up the wiki edit, should be fixed now.
best regards,
Garry
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 15:36, Garry Keenor wrote:
> @Paul Allen - thank you for your comment. I agree with you, and so I've
> softened the guidance around use of electrified=yes.
>
Thanks. I often forget this myself, but we should strive to permit
step-wise
refinement - allow something to be
@Paul Allen - thank you for your comment. I agree with you, and so I've
softened the guidance around use of electrified=yes. A mapper with general
railway experience would be able to determine the type with aerial imagery
of a reasonable resolution - especially 3rd and 4th rail systems which are
When I just checked around Gunnersbury I noticed that someone is already
retagging the London Underground to electrified=4th_rail so this
discussion is probably already irrelevant
On 2020-06-09 23:12, Michael Reichert wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Am 09/06/2020 um 15.36 schrieb Colin Smale:
>
Hi Colin,
Am 09/06/2020 um 15.36 schrieb Colin Smale:
> Great idea. Not sure about using "3rd" and "4th" though - it's a bit
> tightly coupled to the English language and possibly prone to error.
> Wouldn't "3rail" and "4rail" fit the bill?
>
> Actually, as electrified=rail is so widely used at
Great idea. Not sure about using "3rd" and "4th" though - it's a bit
tightly coupled to the English language and possibly prone to error.
Wouldn't "3rail" and "4rail" fit the bill?
Actually, as electrified=rail is so widely used at present, how about
making that explicitly "3rd rail" and
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 09:16, Garry Keenor wrote:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/3rd_and_4th_rail
>
> Definition: A track electrified with a 4th rail system, with two
> additional rails on insulators and two shoe pickup by the train, and
> traction current returning via
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/3rd_and_4th_rail
Definition: A track electrified with a 4th rail system, with two additional
rails on insulators and two shoe pickup by the train, and traction current
returning via one of the insulated rails
best regards,
Garry
26 matches
Mail list logo
