On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 20:20 Jarek Piórkowski <ja...@piorkowski.ca wrote:
> I agree with you that "siding" is not a good description, but it > seemed the least-wrong one of the 4 railway values in use. "Spur" to > me sounds like something that branches off and ends (as illustrated > for railways). Meanwhile with service=siding I am looking for a > description for tracks that connect two stretches of regular tracks. > You're right, spur doesn't seem to fit either. I do like your suggestions - "irregular" should be clear enough, and I > like "auxillary" as well except I don't know if its meaning is > commonly-enough understood. "Minor" seems like it could be > misunderstood: if you have two lines, one of which runs more > frequently than the other, are the tracks of the less-frequent line > "minor"? Or how about service=detour? > I agree that minor could be misunderstood. detour seems a bit unsuitable for turn tracks or connections because afaik it implies a longer route, but the tracks i have in mind are rather shortcuts. Maybe deviation doesn't have this meaning? But don't you also want to include tracks that are only used for drives to the depot? If so, auxiliary/irregular/secondary seems like a better fit anyway. I chose "siding" because I didn't want to invent new tag value, to > avoid too big and slow of a change. But maybe we should do it, what do > you think? > Imo if a tag or key doesn't fit it's better to invent a new. It would be nice though to hear opinions from other mappers. Besides, are you sure that siding tracks for trams similar to those for trains don't exist somewhere? If they exist and we use service=siding for auxiliary tracks, there won't be a distinction anymore (or a new tag would have to be invented for real tram siding tracks). Or how about if we were recommend that of the current options, siding > should be used (to attempt to standardize what we have); and in > parallel launch a formal proposal process for adding more proper tram > service=irregular? > I wouldn't recommend this. It seems too confusing and i don't see a benefit. >
_______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
