Frederik Ramm wrote: > The problem of OSM editors being confused by a strange line that > cuts through houses in the editor perhaps.
Which is perhaps 0.1% of the (largely rural) abandoned railroads mapped in OSM, so largely immaterial to the discussion. And if you're confused by that 0.1%, heaven knows what you'll do when faced with the superfluity of admin boundaries in many parts of the world. (And let's not start on proposed highways.) I'm fully with Russ and Greg on this one. For the few vocal deletionists who seem to have ants in their pants about this, may I suggest that you just learn to read 'railway=abandoned' as 'manmade=former_railway_grade', which is entirely verifiable and consistent with OSM's approach of meaningful broad-brush duck tagging. Thanks. Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Moving-historic-railroad-ways-from-OSM-to-OpenHistoricalMap-tp5839116p5839518.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
