The current four service values are based on physical characteristics of the track that are easily observed on the ground and unlikely to change.
This proposal seems to overload that with an indication of how the track is used, and we already have a tag for that: usage. Granted, none of its existing values seem like a great fit, but if we're going to add new values, wouldn't that be the right place?
I can't recall having seen a tram siding, but I have seen light rail sidings. Given the fuzzy line between the two, it seems unwise for any of their (many) common tags to have different meanings.
Also, does this problem even need solving? With route relations, consumers can easily deduce that a given track is not normally used, so why have a redundant method of indicating the same thing? They're certainly more work to create and maintain, but they also provide more benefits, so that seems fair.
S
_______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
