Goods-only and empty-coaching-stock lines can be markedly lower-spec (such that they cannot be used by passenger-carrying services), and are effectively a subsidiary system. There aren't all that many examples left in the UK.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Dave F. <dave...@madasafish.com> wrote: > I'm unsure of the difference between passenger_lines=* & tracks=*. > > Reading the wiki page, it appears the writer is confused as well, stating > in the last paragraph, that the 'passenger' bit is redundant as "all kinds > of tracks connecting the same railway stations or junction should be > counted with no regard to the train services running on it." & it's a > "workaround" for tracks. > > Cheers > Dave F. > > > > On 07/10/2015 09:24, Richard Mann wrote: > > Putting tracks=1 on multiple parallel tracks is also potentially > misleading. It's a method of tagging that's been superseded by drawing each > line separately. > > So I took to adding passenger_lines=N, to avoid a compatability conflict. > I only did N=1 or N>=4, though. > > I'd suggest converting the tagging to tracks=1+passenger_lines=2. > > Richard > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > >> I have asked WJtW about this in june this year but received no answer. >> Then I saw user BAGgeraar remove the tracks tag so I asked him about it and >> he too asked WJtW and received no answer. >> On the german forum there is a thread [1] about it also indicating it is >> a superfluous tag when all tracks are mapped. >> >> It borders on vandalism. >> >> [1] <http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30099> >> >> Regards, >> Maarten >> >> >> On 2015-10-07 09:20, Colin Smale wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> User WJtW[1] has been making large numbers of edits to railways across >>> Europe in the past few months, all with the changeset comment >>> "Electrified". Most of them are adding tags like gauge=1435 which may >>> well be right (although I have no idea of his source for this). >>> However on many occasions he has added tracks=N to the individual >>> tracks where they are already mapped as N separate tracks. According >>> to the wiki this should now be interpreted as N*N tracks. For example, >>> the Channel Tunnel Rail Link south-east of London, is composed of two >>> tracks (see [2] for a sample way). They are now both tagged with >>> tracks=2, saying that each way represents 2 tracks, suggesting there >>> are 4 in total, which is wrong. >>> >>> I have sent two messages explaining as above and requesting that they >>> review this tagging, but no response so far. I noticed that another >>> mapper has also added a comment to at least one changeset with the >>> same intent. >>> >>> Any ideas how we can stop this behaviour, and repair the "damage"? >>> >>> //colin >>> >>> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/WJtW >>> >>> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34574683 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing > listtalk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > > ------------------------------ > [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
