Steve, If you are finding PCIX those are the call letters for the railroad that is the owner, they may also be the operator.
Now here is the tricky bit, I will use the example of a local short line railroad. This railroad the property is owned by the county and the port; one railroad (GNPX) has the operating rights who then contracts with a second company that is a railroad (BDTL) yet the line in which they are running is known as another railroad (ESFR). If any of you can sort this out into the proper categories I think it will help a few many people. If I had to sort out the problem in the past email I would say that it is probably laid out as such: Join Powers Board is the landowner CalTrain is the owner, operator, and UP has operational rights to the corridor. Best Regards, Nathan P On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 6:13 PM, stevea <stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > On Dec 20, 2014, at 12:35 PM, stevea wrote: >> > Yes, I'll use owner= if known, and it is name= which displays in ORM >> as the name of the line. Many lines had name= as the service run upon them >> (like Caltrain instead of Union Pacific), and I have corrected this where I >> know it was wrong in OSM. But I haven't corrected all of these, just the >> ones I know. And now I think I'll have to go back and correct name=Union >> Pacific as the name of Union Pacific's subdivision for the line that >> Caltrain is run upon: Caltrain itself should be a relation. And so on. >> > > Tod Fitch replies: > >> I was under the very strong impression that the main line from San Jose >> to San Francisco is owned by the Joint Powers Board (CalTrain) and not by >> Union Pacific. I believe that there are branches off that owned by Union >> Pacific and maybe even BNSF but that the main right of way was actually >> Caltrain's. Any place one could confirm or deny that? >> > > Let's suppose Joint Powers Board is the owner. Does that mean that > owner=Joint Powers Board, operator=Caltrain (and a route relation for > Caltrain's services: Baby Bullet and Local) is correct? What do we put > into the name= tag? A subdivision name? Perhaps "Joint Powers Board" (as > well as, or instead of the owner tag)? > > As I look in the (excellent) "CPUC_Rail_Crossing_List_v20140603.xls" > document recently pointed to, I find no occurrence of "Joint Powers Board" > in the whole sheet. Though, I do recognize it as a real entity that > administers the Caltrain service (and it may own the track, too). I do > find "PCIX: Caltrain" in the Rail System column, though, so that is a good > indication we might put PCIX, Caltrain, or PCIX:Caltrain in the name= tag. > > It seems we are still a little unclear on how to (fully, "properly") tag > rail in the USA, with California trying to be a leader in OSM (again), but > at least this discussion seems to be getting us closer. Good! > > SteveA > California > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
