On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 13:43, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>
> 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.
Hi Stephen,
The problem I was initially trying to solve initially was lack of
definition or standardization. Similar types of tram track
("non-revenue", "auxillary", "irregular" - as you wish to call them)
are being tagged inconsistently as service=spur, service=siding, or
service=yard, even within the same city, because a standard was never
suggested.
I wanted to tag some non-revenue track and there wasn't a
specification of how it should be tagged. As I wrote in the initial
message to tagging list, on-ground difference might be that standing
street-side, on regular track one might see a tram go by every 5
minutes, whereas on non-revenue trackage at least hours and possibly
days might go by between trams. Relations can indicate this, but
service tag was already used and rendered - just not used
consistently.
It is true that usage is a more correct word for this, but in looking
at several dozen cities I saw hardly any tram track currently tagged
with usage. If making a new tag/value, using usage might be a good
idea.
thanks,
--Jarek
_______________________________________________
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
