I haven't (tediously) added up all the track-miles, but I would estimate that at the Amtrak level, USA Rail is perhaps 75% - 80% complete. However, this optimistic number comes with caveats:

1) While most (26 out of 43) Amtrak routes are "complete," for the great majority of these, the completion is only for public_transport:version=1 not 2, as is the longer-term goal. Of the remaining 17, 15 are mostly or substantially complete, except for Texas Eagle, which needs a lot of work from Arizona eastward. But two are not even "stubbed in" yet: the Shuttle, and the rather-complex-to-call-a-single-thing Northeast Regional routes. Wouldn't you know, these last 20% are going to be the most tedious and difficult, as "just" these two routes represent our most complex route data yet to enter.

2) The "higher level" route=train relations described above might be about 80% done, but the "middle level" (infrastructure) route=railway relations of named Subdivisions still need lots of work -- we are only at maybe 35% completion. Looking at OpenRailwayMap (which shows usage= tags as red/yellow/orange for high-speed/mainline/branch rail), we see that the USA is enjoying better coverage and connectivity, but still has many "bald patches." Also, just because a usage= tag is applied to a rail segment doesn't mean its name= tag is correct nor does it mean that all identically-named rail segments are collected together into an infrastructure (route=railway) relation -- all three should be true to say that rail is well-tagged in OSM.

3) Only one or two states (California and Montana, the latter is pretty sketchy) boast their own statewide rail wiki pages. Sure, efforts to better tag rail can (and do!) take place in other states, but there is nothing like a wiki to measure/share progress and "divvy up the work" where everybody can participate using our wiki method. You can improve USA rail without a wiki, but in my opinion (especially when there is more than one person in a state pushing the same boulder uphill) it really does make things easier: document, keep track, don't duplicate efforts, and get that great feeling of checking off something as Done when you get to 100%.

4) Even some of the routes marked "Complete" might still be kind of rough: stations and platforms may not be correct or fully fleshed out, underlying infrastructure might not be correctly named or tagged.

In short (too late!), OpenPublicTransportMap is a "fair" illustration of our Amtrak and more-local route=train relations, with perhaps 85% visual coverage. We are getting there! Infrastructure (route=railway) relations lag far behind this, at about 35% completion. Though California can again boast that our infrastructure is "early alpha" and maybe 97% complete, though not completely accurate -- work continues.

The major still-to-do tasks in fixing up USA rail continue to be these:

1) Change TIGER name= tag to operator=, then issue a new correct name= tag (like "XYZ Subdivision"), 2) Add a usage= tag like main or branch. This makes the infrastructure "light up with color" in ORM, and 3) Collect identically named rail segments together into a route=railway (infrastructure) relation.

After 3) it's almost a cinch to combine infrastructure together into route=train relations (like Amtrak), at least public_transport:version=1. We do have some public_transport:version=2 relations to serve as good examples, so you really could even roll up your sleeves and do those, too! This isn't about getting detailed passenger rail SCHEDULES into OSM, just rail infrastructure and routes. Any volunteers?! See http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Amtrak and call "Dibs!" on a route or two!

Given the rather dismal state of rail data from our poorly aging TIGER import, I must ask the august readers of this list: How complete and correct is rail tagging in YOUR state?

Regards,
SteveA
California

(I think that's called "cheerleading," and I'm not terribly embarrassed for having done so)

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Reply via email to