On 02/09/2015 01:22, Russ Nelson wrote:
Bryce Nesbitt writes:
> I've worked on "rails to trails" projects where the physical trace
> of the railbed was subsumed by fences, lines of trees and (in once
> case) a swimming pool.
I'll bet you're talking about the Wallkill Valley Trail north of
Rosendale! I think I know the very place you're talking about! Guy had
built his house right up to the ROW property line, and put his
swimming pool on the ROW itself.
Too bad for that guy that he didn't check OpenStreetMap first, because
there was an abandoned railroad mapped in his back yard. Now that the
trail has been built, he has a fence about 5' behind his house. I
can't imagine he's happy now.
I think Bryce's observation lays this issue to rest. No, you should
not delete railways you cannot see, because they might still exist in
the property lines, and if you haven't checked, you don't know. If
somebody added it to OSM, they probably have better reason to have
done so than you have reason to delete it, so leave it there!
Thanks for your cooperation!
Map entities that you can see on the ground. i realise there are some,
like boundaries, but we have verifiable proof they exist.
For old railway line map the entities that remain, such embankments,
bridges etc, but not the actual track if it's been removed or there's a
housing estate built over it.
To repeat myself: OSM is a database of *current* entities.
Dave F.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
