Neither this talk-us list nor I have received any response to my request for 
comments (on- or off-list).  Hence I might believe it is safe to assume there 
is no widespread opposition to harmonizing the network=* tag on all Amtrak 
routes to network=Amtrak without further subdividing values within that 
key-value pair (as below).  Again, the passenger=* tag (as below, with values 
[suburban, regional, national, international]) now denotes the kind of 
passenger service available without subdividing the single network of Amtrak, 
which seems a valid justification for setting all Amtrak routes to be 
network=Amtrak.  We can take further Discussion on this to  Thank you.

While our Amtrak wiki characterizes many route=train relations as "rough," they 
continue to improve (better tagging as above, public_transport:version=1 being 
upgraded to v2, underlying infrastructure route=railway relations created with 
members that are better named and with correct usage=* tags, many platforms 
have been added thanks to the "Add platforms" MapRoulette challenge...).  The 
US has one of the largest, if not THE largest rail and passenger rail networks 
on Earth, it is a large task to improve the many pieces to be "world-class 
passenger train route data."  OSM is well underway towards this goal and 
progress has been steady for several years.  See and/or if you wish to 

Did you "play with trains" when you were younger?  Please help improve OSM's 
"national train set" in the US:  it's actually rather fun!


> On Apr 3, 2018, at 11:08 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea <> 
> wrote:
> I remain listening as to what OSM might best do with the network= tag on 
> Amtrak routes.  Some additional research (Wikipedia) reveals that "Amtrak 
> services fall into three groups:  short-haul service on the Northeast 
> Corridor, state-supported short haul service outside the Northeast Corridor, 
> and long-distance service known within Amtrak as the National Network."  (It 
> is not known what routes are in this "National Network.")  As for 
> "international" routes — there are three which continue into Canada — these 
> are not mentioned, although it may be that these three international routes 
> are considered to be in the National Network.
> Current tagging (passenger=*) of national, regional and suburban (meaning 
> "commuter") seem to correlate quite well with these three groups, and the 
> three international routes are indeed tagged passenger=international.  But 
> that is the passenger=* tag, not the network=* tag.  I still wonder (out 
> loud, here) whether all their network=* tags should be set as simply 
> network=Amtrak or whether these three (four, really) groups should be set as:
> network=Amtrak Commuter (on Amtrak routes which are now set to 
> passenger=suburban, meaning "commuter"),
> network=Amtrak Regional (on Amtrak routes which are now set to 
> passenger=regional),
> network=Amtrak National (on Amtrak routes which are now set to 
> passenger=national),
> network=Amtrak International (on Amtrak routes which are now set to 
> passenger=international).
> Because these seem redundant, given the same information can be gleaned from 
> the passenger=* tag, all Amtrak routes set as:
> network=Amtrak
> is what I'm leaning towards doing.  Although, I do remain listening to 
> opinion/guidance from anybody here on talk-us, including pointing me to 
> additional on-line authoritative data.  We're talking about fifty or fewer 
> route=train relation tags, not huge.  Though, as the Northeast Regionals (and 
> other Amtrak routes) break out of rough public_transport:version=1 and grow 
> into version 2 routes, this number will grow.  This is partly why I want to 
> establish network=* tagging as correct, to get ahead of this curve.
> Thank you for reading,
> SteveA

Talk-us mailing list

Reply via email to