On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 08:57, Garry Keenor <garry.kee...@gmail.com> 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 own electrical feeding arrangement. > It would also run the risk of confusion in the mappers mind - they would > read as far as electrified=rail in the tag wiki and miss the later option > for 4th rail. I'm happy to leave electrified=rail to mean 3rd rail if that > is what the group prefers. > Using electrified=rail to mean 3 rails and having a sub-tag for 4 rails is a bad thing. But perhaps there is a case for retaining electrified=rail to mean "It's electrified using rails rather than contact line but I don't know how many rails." You mentioned that contact lines are often visible on aerial imagery. Mappers may know a route is electrified by other means (such as a newspaper article saying the route has been electrified) but don't know how many rails there are, only that there is no sign of a contact line. Argument against it: there may be a contact line but the imagery is too coarse for it to be visible or the mapper doesn't have the skill to interpret the image correctly so uses electrified=rail where it should be electrified=yes. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
