> any thoughts or suggestions? IMHO there is not much difference between a "almost completed then abandoned" and "completed then abandoned" railway, from the perspective of OSM. Either way, it's not a present day railway, yet there are some physical features that history buffs may be interested in seeing. So if it was me, I would mark it railway=abandoned, add a note or two, and be done with it. You can use the normal embankment=yes, cutting=yes. You could get your "unbuilt" factoid in sideways by using some tag like completed_date=never.
The trouble with inventing a new tag for a fringe case is nothing is ever likely to support it, because there will never be more than a couple of uses in the database. Or maybe it's not that fringe. We have a very similar case here: http://osm.org/go/uG4JYUwZt- Whether it was "completed" is arguable. Most probably, no train ever ran on it - although its creator insisted otherwise. I can't really see any reason that that fact would ever need to be represented graphically, other than in the most comprehensive of railway history maps. Steve _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
