The level crossings sound pretty straight forward. The exception being the single ID applying to all crossings on private property. Many of those may still only be a single crossing though.
Grade separated sounds like it requires a judgment call. Just place a node with only the ref# where the ways cross? Make it a crossing (I don't like this) Tag the overpass or tunnel (or this)? As those are not crossings in any sense that we care about, I say just a ref number in a node only on the train track way and forgo any railway tag. The main use for us might be to make sure there is an overpass or tunnel there. Dale On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On 02.10.2012 22:29, Charlie Smothers wrote: > >> How do folks think >> that this should be tagged? Just use a railway=level_crossing, ref= on a >> node near the crossing? >> > > railway=level_crossing would usually be reserved to tag the crossing > itself, not to annotate it from a distance. > > > Should it have a special tag so that it is clear >> that it is in fact a USDOT ID number? >> > > People sometimes use tags like "namespace:ref" to indicate whose number it > is, so that would make "usdot:ref=...". (A "fdot:ref" seems to be in common > use on Florida highways.) > > > Tag the node at the intersection >> of the highway and the railway? >> > > Yes - of course if it really is a level crossing and not grade separated. > Grade separated is more difficult because there will not necessarily be a > node at the precise intersection. > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > ______________________________**_________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-us<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us> > -- Dale Puch
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
