Chuck, I think you make some good points in your email. I would discourage the hang ups on the diffring railroad terminology as it is different by railroad and location. Coming to a decision on how we are going to tag is more important. I agree that line segments are useful and interested to hear how you would suggest to tag them.
Here some examples of the use of the ref=* tag https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=39.77267707885666&lon=-104.98619109392166&zoom=18&style=standard https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=39.78832735578315&lon=-104.99941036105156&zoom=19&style=standard https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=null&lat=41.860825816587464&lon=-87.63588219881058&zoom=18&style=standard Regards, Nathan P email: natf...@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:28 AM Chuck Sanders <nath...@gmail.com> wrote: > Nathan, thanks - I've been thinking over your email and use case since > coffee this morning, and looking for the right questions to pick your brain > too, so that we can get the documentation right in the NA tagging wiki, and > all of us on the same page. I also started working up a a NA-specific and > simplified JOSM tagging preset, so that's part of my impetus to really > start getting into the weeds on this - part of my goal of the preset is to > make it easy for all of us to tag consistently on the important tags ... so > a huge part of that is making sure everything I do *agrees* with what > everyone else understands those important tags to be! > > In particular, I can see the value of that BNSF track segment document > you've been working on with others, and completely agree that's also > information that should be captured properly in our metadata as well, I'm > just trying to understand myself whether the ref tag is likely to be the > right tag to do that. > > So far, I'm familiar with at least two different sets of "line numbers" in > the US, and I haven't seen either used consistently before in the US in the > way I understand that ref tag was meant to be used. > > One is the number set that started with the ICC Valuation Map Sections 100 > years ago. A lot of that data persisted long term, and I still see > references in current documents, especially with NS material (I'm an east > coast guy). I also still see that referenced and used in a good bit of my > CSXT documentation. I've seen some of the related numbers also referred to > as accounting numbers, and these do appear in certain current FRA records > as well. > > The second is the "newer" FRA Line Segment numbers. I believe the way FRA > intended these to be used when they directed the creation of this system is > the closest analogy we have to the German route numbers I was referring > to. NS does keep them on their track charts, but I haven't seen them on > much CSX documentation. Interestingly, even though these are meant to be > used in the crossing number inventory forms, I often see this omitted in NS > forms (even ones revised and completed recently), though it's usally > completed in CSX forms. > > Unfortunately, as I work as a bridge inspector and designer and not a > track inspector (and have always worked peripherally to the railroads and > not directly for them), I'm not directly working with the same information > you are as a track inspector. Have these line segment numbers really > finally been adopted as real, working route numbers? > > Chuck > VA > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:30 AM Natfoot <natf...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sorry I saw your email in the ORM list and responded directly. >> I find line segment numbers on track charts and timetables. I mostly work >> with lines that have left BNSF or its predecessors so I have line segments >> that were assigned by those railroads. Here is a great list of >> line segments of the BNSF/BN/GN/NP Etc. >> . >> http://www.nprha.org/NP%20Track%20Segments%20of%20BNSF/BNSF%20Track%20Segments%20Version%2010.pdf >> >> I'm on line segments, 403, 405, 408, and 411. >> And I don't trust the FRA database to be accurate. >> >> Nathan P >> email: natf...@gmail.com >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 8:45 PM Chuck Sanders <nath...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I'd love any information you can send regarding any sort of route number >>> in use here like you're discussing. I've worked around the US rail industry >>> for several decades (federal bridge engineer), and have never heard of such >>> a thing, so I'm very curious. >>> >>> You're not talking about the FRAARCID in the FRA dataset, right? >>> >>> And I have to say, while "don't tag for the renderer" is almost always >>> right, it also doesn't mean that a tag that works well already is >>> automatically wrong, provided it also doesn't damage the validity of >>> integrity of your dataset, and is consistent with the data scheme. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Chuck >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 10:38 PM Natfoot <natf...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Chuck, >>>> >>>> Thank You for your time fixing the reporting marks section. >>>> >>>> Railroad Line numbers do exist for railroads in the United States and >>>> Canada. >>>> Ref= is for the use of line numbers. I can send you links to line >>>> numbers. Line numbers were given to a line by the railroad when it was >>>> laid and often lasts it's entire lifetime, without a change. The other way >>>> I see it used is to identify what track number it is: Eg Main 1, or you are >>>> in a yard and there is track 1, 2, 3, etc. Both of these are examples of >>>> track numbers. >>>> >>>> I will discourage the changing of in use tags for the soul purpose of >>>> editing for the renderer. This is a renderer problem and not a problem >>>> with OSM. Here is the wiki about not editing for the renderer >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer >>>> >>>> There is a OpenRailwayMap email list. I was just there chatting about >>>> how Traffic Control is different from Train Protection. I will agree that >>>> ORM under represents the data from North America that is already within the >>>> map. Please make these suggestions in the ORM list to make the ORM >>>> renderer more usable as you have described. >>>> >>>> Quote from your email: >>>> " The label is occasionally the spelled out operator name, but most >>>> commonly (better than 90% of examples) the operator reporting marks, which >>>> serve as a standardized shorthand. Even the names, as we tag them in the >>>> name field, are rarely used to refer to the lines, and are essentially >>>> never used on mapping here.They're the absolute last-choice designator, and >>>> you *really* have to hunt to find any rail map in the US (including by the >>>> operators) that labels any line by name." " That's the US industry >>>> standard." >>>> >>>> All of this paragraph are style choices when rendering the data from >>>> within OSM. If you would like this to change, talk to the ORM list or make >>>> a better renderer. I will reject your assertion that we should dumb down >>>> the map just becuase that is the way TOPO had it. If you are a railroad >>>> owner and you are worried about the amount of information on OSM that is a >>>> valid argument but that is not the way you are presenting this as of now. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your thoughts on all of this. I agree that OpenStreetMap, >>>> Open Railway Map, and the renderer could be improved to better show off >>>> what we have here in North America. Researchers utilize OSM as we have the >>>> most up to date railway map in the country of any data source and it is >>>> important to maintain standards. I believe that the wiki pertaining to >>>> railway=* is confusing and the addition of continent specific tagging makes >>>> it more difficult to understand. If you would like to help me with >>>> cataloging this information this is one of the side projects. But right now >>>> I am over on Open Historical Map adding railroads over there. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> >>>>> Nathan P >>>>> email: natf...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>> >>>>
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
