On 20/2/22 11:29, stevea wrote:
On Feb 19, 2022, at 4:11 PM, Warin <[email protected]> wrote:
Someone is mapping a 'train tour' into OSM.
Should such things be mapped?
Yes. As someone who extensively maps rail infrastructure relations (route=railway) as well as both
passenger routes (route=train, route=light_rail, route=tram, route=monorail...) which are
"typical passenger trains" (like commuter lines, light rail, urban trams, airport-style
monorails...) AND passenger routes on rail which are "heritage / tourist / museum"
trains, it is clear to many in OSM that these deserved to be mapped: they are quite extensively.
Additionally, sometimes the (subtle, see above!) tagging schemes (not to mention PTv1 and PTv2 differences)
for these differing kinds of passenger rail services (passenger=international, passenger=national,
passenger=regional, passenger=suburban, passenger=urban, passenger=local) need explaining. Sometimes, such
"tourist" routes deserve to be tagged "passenger=local" (or maybe urban, depending on
length and speed), if they provide some modicum of passenger service (in addition to the touristic or
"heritage / museum" kinds of services). Other times, a passenger=* tag doesn't belong, as the
trains are only for excursion or educational purposes.
For a rich example, please see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads/Passenger ,
especially the last section: "Tourism, museum, heritage and historic (possibly
passenger=local) trains."
Wow. Thanks for that...
I would think passenger=tourist would fit...
Do recall that it is typical around the world for there to be TWO route
relations associated with such a passenger route:
Some of ours, such as the India Pacific, are tourist only, other
'commuter' services are different shorter routes.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
