Volker (hello!) discusses that the tag (used in the USA, but not extensively) of "reporting_marks" isn't (I paraphrase him a bit) "as international as OSM might like it," and proposes presumed-better tag "operator_identifier" (I correct a minor spelling error in his posted suggestion). Volker also mentions that this tag seems to be meant for rolling stock, asking on what sorts of OSM data the tag will be applied.
Meanwhile, Chuck (hello!) answers that reporting_marks will be applied to ways (perhaps not as originally intended to identify the owner / operator of rolling stock) but that this use of reporting_marks (or operator_identifier, it isn't yet decided) is semantically an excellent OSM syntactic synonym for "short_name_of_operator." (I agree). I'm of mixed opinion on this. On the one hand, I agree with Volker that "regional tagging" (as in all of North America, as "reporting_marks" are used in all three countries) should be discouraged in OSM in favor of more worldwide standards / tagging, especially as they already exist (though, "operator_identifier" comes up empty in taginfo). However, as this tag doesn't yet exist (in Europe or elsewhere), that diminishes its value, except going forward (and there's nothing wrong with that). And, the tag "reporting_marks" (also, "reporting_mark" is used more often, though primarily by one mapper, Chuck and I have discussed these two tags should be conflated into "reporting_marks" as a single tag) already DOES exist, and it IS an existing "regional standard." So, I'm sitting on the fence, seeing both potential solutions have merit. What I think might work is for North American rail mapping to continue to "standardize" on using "reporting_marks" as a tag with a value that effectively stands in for "short_name_of_operator" (and we should wiki-document this) and others should chime in (please) with what I agree with Chuck is a good use of this simple (and widespread: in all of Canada, USA and Mexico, which interchange a lot of rail with each other) "rail standard," regional-to-North-America though it is. If Germany or European and / or Asian / African / South American countries want to something like this, they might get started now, using (as I propose North America does) using their own flavor of "reporting_marks" (as originally intended to identify rolling stock) as a novel and useful method to identify carriers (owners / operators) on OSM ways as a synonym for short_name_of_operator. Then, at some point in the future when there can be some global OSM harmonization of these, a proposal to roll them all into "operator_identifier" (which suits me just fine) can take place as a good idea that will standardize this sort of tagging worldwide. But in the meantime, I think it a good idea for these to develop locally / regionally, with the terminology to both mappers and those familiar with railroad terminology (as it is used locally / regionally) being used. That will "root" and better establish these tags, I believe this is (almost?) necessary (first). The globalization / standardization can happen later. This seems a workable approach, though I'd like to hear from others who might posit that a "no, let's globalize such tagging immediately" approach is better. SteveA _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
