Frederik Ramm wrote: > What everybody can see is a clearing or change in the surface > of something. That's fine to map. > > Inferring from that that there must have been a railway there is a > step too far. We are mappers, not trappers.
Ok, let's try an experiment. Go to http://cycle.travel/map/journey/15120, click the route highlight (in purple), and click 'Find photos'. I spot a bridge in the characteristic Victorian railway style, a viaduct, the remains of a signal box, a large embankment of the type used to build railways and nothing else from that period, and A SODDING RAILWAY PLATFORM FOR CRYING OUT LOUD. Tell me again you can't infer there must have been a railway there. I dare you. I double dare you. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/stop-deleting-abandoned-railroads-tp5852056p5852474.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
