On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 03:27:14PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 08/18/2015 03:21 PM, Richard wrote: > > Especially as many railways come with more or less dense key:ele tagging > > they are much more reliable to derive height profile information than any > > other data we have. > > Do I understand you correctly: We should map abandoned railways because > we lack a good source of elevation data?
no, we should map them for the same reason that we map natural=ridge or embankment=yes. It provides additional information. > > That sounds like a very strange proposal to me. Perhaps the wiki > documenting the "abandoned" value should be amended by "not to be used > for abandoned mountain railways, because cycle routers will prefer > routing along abandoned railway lines under the assumption that they > must be flat"? the information whether it was a rack railway should be probably preserved as well. It adds other interesting information, not only for cycle routers. Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
