Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines

[mick]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:18:30 +1100
Ian Sergeant  wrote:

> On 26 November 2012 12:36, Alex Sims  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

Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines

[mick]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:06:27 +1030
Alex Sims  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

[Paul Norman]

> 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

[Ian Sergeant]

On 26 November 2012 12:36, Alex Sims  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

[Alex Sims]

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

[mick]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +1100
Matt White  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=-37.780512&lon=144.982887&zoom=18&layers=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

[mick]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +1100
Matt White  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=-37.780512&lon=144.982887&zoom=18&layers=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] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach

[Steve Bennett]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 9:07 PM, David Bannon wrote:

> Issue really is these guys will have some pretty heavy change controls
> in place. And there will be some pressure to not add anything unless its
> really proved essential, every extra bit of processing slows each
> refresh.
>
> So, we need a really good case rather than clever coding I'm afraid.
>
>
Thanks, I stand corrected.

Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines

[Steve Bennett]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Ian Sergeant  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 
>railway
=abandoned .
Where it has been reused as a cycle path then add
highway
=cycleway 

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=trail&id=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 (Ian Steer)

[Ian Steer]

> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-au<http://lists.openstr
> eetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121125/494bb
b7f/attachment-0001.html>

--

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:35:36 +1100
From: Steve Bennett 
To: Matt White 
Cc: talk-au 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>* Unpaved roads are difficult to really classify the surface in terms 
>of
anything other than dirt/sand/rock. The surface state changes over time from
smooth immediately after grading, to possibly deep
>ruts/corrugations/mud after rain and wear. In this case, my personal
opinion would be to use some sort of tag like surface condition (options
being something like: maintained | uneven | degraded |
>corrugated | rocky | rutted | deep_rutted, but even those change
immediately after track maintenance), with perhaps a best/worst case tag or
similar

One thought that occurs here would be to tag the *maintenance* of a track
rather than its *current state*. Some tracks are essentially never
maintained, while others are graded frequently. That, combined with the
season that you're travelling (eg, late summer vs early spring) might be
enough to make an informed decision.



> * Overall, it seems like Australia has both the special conditions 
> requiring some extensions to the current 4WD/dirt road mapping data 
> and the active mapping community to back it up. I don't see why we 
> shouldn' agree on a handful of tagging rules for the AU conditions on 
> this list and use them (assuming that they are well thought out etc). 
> Document them nicely so the rest of the world can take them up, and 
> make the rendering changes etc ourselves (how hard can a casing change 
> be in the renderer? If we can do it an submit it to the trac 
> system...)
>
>
AFAIK the major issue with rendering changes is resources to implement them.
So, if someone writes the code to do it, much greater chance of it
happening.

Steve
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121125/c2a8a
2a4/attachment-0001.html>

--

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:07:37 +1100
From: David Bannon 
To: talk-au 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
Message-ID: <1353838057.4071.47.camel@Davo-LT>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 20:35 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:

> One thought that occurs here would be to tag the *maintenance* of a 
> track rather than its *current state*.

Yep, that would be useful info indeed. Not sure how 'collectible' it would
be though. The (dirt) road that I live on is graded reasonably frequently
but I could not tell you how many times per year or when it was last done.
And I live on that road !

 
> AFAIK the major issue with rendering changes is resources to implement 
> them. So, if someone writes the code to do it, much greater chance of 
> it happening.
> 
Maybe, maybe not. The actual changes required are not that extensive really.
I have built a mapnik and pgsql system on my laptop using the OSM config
files. Its trivial to include new tags into the rendering database.
(Although unfortunately, "4wd_only" has some technical
issues.) Getting Mapnik to then render them is more a matter of agreeing on
how to do it than actually doing it IMHO. Sadly, our desired "dashed casing"
is already used for tunnels, but possibly a different colour will work, or
dashed infill ? But importantly, we can copy, in part, how its done for a
tunnel.

Issue really is these guys will have some pretty heavy change controls in
place. And there will be some pressure to not add anything unless its really
proved essential, every extra bit of processing slows each refresh.

So, we need a really good case rather than clever coding I'm afraid.

David 








--

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:28:04 +1100
From: Ian Sergeant 
To: Matt White 
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

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

Re: [talk-au] NSW Alphanumeric routes

[Mark Pulley]

On 04/11/2012, at 10:13 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:

> I also noticed on the RTA site a while back, they were saying that
> they were trying to work with map and data providers to provide timely
> and accurate updates.  It certainly may be worthwhile sending them an
> email to see if we can take advantage of that, especially if we can
> get a timetable for the coverplate removal.


Has anyone else contacted the RTA about this yet? If not, I've just got back 
from my far-north Queensland trip so I now have time to do this (in between 
mapping from the trip!).

Mark P.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines

[Matt White]

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  
(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 > 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=-37.780512&lon=144.982887&zoom=18&layers=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




___
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 Sergeant]

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  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=-37.780512&lon=144.982887&**zoom=18&layers=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
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach

[David Bannon]

On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 20:35 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:

> One thought that occurs here would be to tag the *maintenance* of a
> track rather than its *current state*.

Yep, that would be useful info indeed. Not sure how 'collectible' it
would be though. The (dirt) road that I live on is graded reasonably
frequently but I could not tell you how many times per year or when it
was last done. And I live on that road !

 
> AFAIK the major issue with rendering changes is resources to implement
> them. So, if someone writes the code to do it, much greater chance of
> it happening.
> 
Maybe, maybe not. The actual changes required are not that extensive
really. I have built a mapnik and pgsql system on my laptop using the
OSM config files. Its trivial to include new tags into the rendering
database. (Although unfortunately, "4wd_only" has some technical
issues.) Getting Mapnik to then render them is more a matter of agreeing
on how to do it than actually doing it IMHO. Sadly, our desired "dashed
casing" is already used for tunnels, but possibly a different colour
will work, or dashed infill ? But importantly, we can copy, in part, how
its done for a tunnel.

Issue really is these guys will have some pretty heavy change controls
in place. And there will be some pressure to not add anything unless its
really proved essential, every extra bit of processing slows each
refresh.

So, we need a really good case rather than clever coding I'm afraid.

David 






___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach

[Steve Bennett]

>* Unpaved roads are difficult to really classify the surface in terms of
anything other than dirt/sand/rock. The surface state changes over time
from smooth immediately after grading, to possibly deep
>ruts/corrugations/mud after rain and wear. In this case, my personal
opinion would be to use some sort of tag like surface condition (options
being something like: maintained | uneven | degraded |
>corrugated | rocky | rutted | deep_rutted, but even those change
immediately after track maintenance), with perhaps a best/worst case tag or
similar

One thought that occurs here would be to tag the *maintenance* of a track
rather than its *current state*. Some tracks are essentially never
maintained, while others are graded frequently. That, combined with the
season that you're travelling (eg, late summer vs early spring) might be
enough to make an informed decision.



> * Overall, it seems like Australia has both the special conditions
> requiring some extensions to the current 4WD/dirt road mapping data and the
> active mapping community to back it up. I don't see why we shouldn' agree
> on a handful of tagging rules for the AU conditions on this list and use
> them (assuming that they are well thought out etc). Document them nicely so
> the rest of the world can take them up, and make the rendering changes etc
> ourselves (how hard can a casing change be in the renderer? If we can do it
> an submit it to the trac system...)
>
>
AFAIK the major issue with rendering changes is resources to implement
them. So, if someone writes the code to do it, much greater chance of it
happening.

Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines

[Steve Bennett]

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  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=-37.780512&lon=144.982887&**zoom=18&layers=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
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au