Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Warin 

On 20/10/19 08:45, cleary wrote:


I would like to confirm that the inclusion of qualifiers such as 
"closed" or "freight only" in the name is NOT appropriate.


+1 for not appropriate. Use the description tag.



e.g.
railway=station
name = xx (closed)
 or
railway=station
name=xxx (freight only)

I understand both are inappropriate uses of the name tag and should 
not be used.


I think the first should be tagged as disused or abandoned such as
disused:railway=station
name=

and the second with
railway=yard
name=xxx

Is that generally agreed?

Yes from me.


What about a former railway station that is now freight only. Can one 
combine disused:railway=station and railway=yard on the one node or 
should there be multiple nodes?


I think they should be areas.

I would not bother with the disused: as it is now in use for a similar 
purpose. Putting both tags on the same way would mean the render has to 
decide what to show. I'd make the choice for them - present use is more 
important. If it is important is some way then use the description tag, 
e.g. 'description=Was a passenger station'.










On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, at 6:53 AM, Ewen Hill wrote:


Hi,
   I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations 
like 
https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1 that 
has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades



There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the 
Wiki. What is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the 
ATG)


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





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



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

Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Warin 

On 19/10/19 20:44, Ewen Hill wrote:

Thanks Warin,
   I have been using a node or polygon for the railway station as 
follows however it is raising a level 2 error in osmose...


name=xxx
historic:railway = station (or station_site)


I think osmose may be complaining that it is not an area?
If an area, then it may just be that historic:railway is not documented 
on the wiki so osmose objects.


If the building can be traced, I would also add a polygon
building=train_station

There appears to be a lot of confusion (see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railway_stations#Stations_and_sites_which_are_not_currently_in_operation ) 
over


  * historic:railway=station
  * railway:historic=station
  * disused=yes
  * not tagging it at all with any railway tags



disused=yes is not good, it should be disused:*=*


I would be against railway:historic... for historic:railway.

The confusion is because people try to map different things:
some try to map things that are no longer there - don't map, use OHM!
some try to map things that are disused - disused:*=*
some try to map things that are re-purposed

The answers are many, and even where the item is the same thing the 
answers change from mapper to mapper and with time.
Example: disused=yes used to be the tagging method, now it is 
disused:*=*...



I want to keep the information from appearing in current travel 
options but available to explain how the township formed around a 
particular location


Personally I don't usually use historic as I am not usually certain of 
the historic worth of the thing. So usually disused: abandoned: etc for me.




Ewen

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 19:33, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:


On 19/10/19 17:53, Ewen Hill wrote:
>
> Hi,
>    I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway
stations
> like
>

https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1
 that

> has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades
>
>
> There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the
> Wiki. What is the best standardised approach (which I will add
to the ATG)


The building is still a building...map as a way with
building=train_station as it is recognisable as a train station?

It does appear to be now a museum... I'd map that as a separate node
with the relevant details.


It was a train station or halt.. Could be be one again? This
should be
an area that includes the building and local track.

disused:railway=halt/station or disused:public_transport=station

or abandoned:*=*

If no longer in existence then consider mapping it in OHM.

Nothing Oz specific about it?


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



--
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia



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

Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread cleary 

I would like to confirm that the inclusion of qualifiers such as "closed" or 
"freight only" in the name is NOT appropriate.

e.g. 
railway=station
name = xx (closed)
 or 
railway=station
name=xxx (freight only)

I understand both are inappropriate uses of the name tag and should not be used.

I think the first should be tagged as disused or abandoned such as
disused:railway=station
name=

and the second with
railway=yard
name=xxx

Is that generally agreed? 

What about a former railway station that is now freight only. Can one combine 
disused:railway=station and railway=yard on the one node or should there be 
multiple nodes?









On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, at 6:53 AM, Ewen Hill wrote:
> 
> Hi,
>  I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations like 
> https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1
>  that has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades
> 
> 
> There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the Wiki. What 
> is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the ATG)
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> 
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Ewen Hill 
Thanks Warin,
   I have been using a node or polygon for the railway station as follows
however it is raising a level 2 error in osmose...

name=xxx
historic:railway = station (or station_site)

If the building can be traced, I would also add a polygon
building=train_station

There appears to be a lot of confusion (see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railway_stations#Stations_and_sites_which_are_not_currently_in_operation
)
over

   - historic:railway=station
   - railway:historic=station
   - disused=yes
   - not tagging it at all with any railway tags

I want to keep the information from appearing in current travel options but
available to explain how the township formed around a particular location

Ewen

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 19:33, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/10/19 17:53, Ewen Hill wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations
> > like
> >
> https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1
>  that
>
> > has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades
> >
> >
> > There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the
> > Wiki. What is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the
> ATG)
>
>
> The building is still a building...map as a way with
> building=train_station as it is recognisable as a train station?
>
> It does appear to be now a museum... I'd map that as a separate node
> with the relevant details.
>
>
> It was a train station or halt.. Could be be one again? This should be
> an area that includes the building and local track.
>
> disused:railway=halt/station or disused:public_transport=station
>
> or abandoned:*=*
>
> If no longer in existence then consider mapping it in OHM.
>
> Nothing Oz specific about it?
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>


-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Adam Horan 
For ones that do not exist at all I have modified some near me to
railway:historic station_site
which was recommended to me some time back. Example
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4395763814/history

If there's a building there, and it's no longer acting as an actual station
then I'd also suggest the disused:railway=halt/station as above.

If it's a tourist train line and not actual public transport, then add
tourism = yes. In the OPs case it appears to be on an actual rail line.

Another example is here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1766897047/history
This one has recently been modified to have public_transport = yes, which I
don't support as the trains only run once a month..., it's purely a
preserved/tourist railway.

Adam


On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 19:33, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/10/19 17:53, Ewen Hill wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations
> > like
> >
> https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1
>  that
>
> > has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades
> >
> >
> > There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the
> > Wiki. What is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the
> ATG)
>
>
> The building is still a building...map as a way with
> building=train_station as it is recognisable as a train station?
>
> It does appear to be now a museum... I'd map that as a separate node
> with the relevant details.
>
>
> It was a train station or halt.. Could be be one again? This should be
> an area that includes the building and local track.
>
> disused:railway=halt/station or disused:public_transport=station
>
> or abandoned:*=*
>
> If no longer in existence then consider mapping it in OHM.
>
> Nothing Oz specific about it?
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Warin 

On 19/10/19 17:53, Ewen Hill wrote:


Hi,
   I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations 
like 
https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1 that 
has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades



There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the 
Wiki. What is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the ATG)



The building is still a building...map as a way with 
building=train_station as it is recognisable as a train station?


It does appear to be now a museum... I'd map that as a separate node 
with the relevant details.



It was a train station or halt.. Could be be one again? This should be 
an area that includes the building and local track.


disused:railway=halt/station or disused:public_transport=station

or abandoned:*=*

If no longer in existence then consider mapping it in OHM.

Nothing Oz specific about it?


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

[talk-au] tagging old railway stations - what is the agreed approach

2019-10-19 Thread Ewen Hill 
Hi,
   I am trying to get some clarity about tagging old railway stations like
https://i1.wp.com/judithsalecich.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-former-Bogantungan-Railway-Station.jpg?ssl=1
that
has not seen a train stop for a numbe of decades


There appears to be a myriads of ways to tag this according to the Wiki.
What is the best standardised approach (which I will add to the ATG)
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au