Talk:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging in Luxembourg

Chevron speed

I am not sure whether to add a tag railway:signal:speed_limit:speed=* to the Chevron (RF1) signal. (It marks the beginning of a section with a restricted speed limit, but the speed is not displayed on the Chevron, but on a previous signal (or not at all).) A comparable German signal, Lf 2, uses railway:signal:speed_limit:speed=none per the documentation, but I think this might be an error, as I understand none to mean "no speed limit". But maybe it means "no number"? Other speed restrictions without a number on the sign use the value of the speed limit, e.g. Polish W 9, but I don't like that since that number is not a property of the signal. --Entbert (talk) 00:54, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

SFI vs. SFI/R

Another point I wasn't sure about is whether the SFI (at main signals) and SFI/R should be considered at separate signals or one and the same signal. --Entbert (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

SFP with SFVb

My main problem with the tagging I proposed are the combined SFP/SFVb signals. Based on the French Wikipedia page, I named the signal aspects exactly as in the case of standalone SFP signals, i.e.

• 
  LU-CFL:SFP1
• 
  LU-CFL:SFVb2
• 
  LU-CFL:SFP2
• 
  LU-CFL:SFP3

However, I think this tagging is problematic. Although the first two aspects are named exactly as the states of an SFP signal and of an SFVb signal according to Wikipedia, they mean different things (based on my understanding – which may be false): At shunting trains have to stop, while at they don't. At non-shunting trains can't pass, while at they can.

So I think these aspects should be tagged differently, but I didn't want to invent a fictional name for the signal on my own. I guess we could just combine the abbreviations SFP and SFVb to SFPVb (which is already used for the file names on Wikimedia Commons), so that we get the states

• 
  LU-CFL:SFP1 LU-CFL:SFPVb1
• 
  LU-CFL:SFVb2 LU-CFL:SFPVb2
• 
  LU-CFL:SFP2
• 
  LU-CFL:SFP3

Follow-up questions would then be:

1. Should the third and fourth state also be renamed? — In my opinion, they shouldn't, as the integrated SFVb does not change the meaning of the signal here.
2. Should the combined signal itself be considered as a separate signal railway:signal:main=LU-CFL:SFPVb? — I really can't decide.

--Entbert (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Level crossing signals - several categories

level crossing, whistle, 10 km/h

I am not sure how to tag the level crossing signs as they have up to three functions at once: They

• inform about a level crossing,
• tell the driver to sound the whistle, and
• indicate the value of the speed limit at the crossing.

But we can only have one signal category. I think crossing[_distant] should be the main one and the whistling is not that important. But I would certainly like to document the speed stated on the sign. Should this be documented with a new "mixed" key railway:signal:crossing:speed=* or should we tag the more natural railway:signal:speed_limit:speed=* without a main-level railway:signal:speed_limit=* tag?

A similar problem occurs affects the SFE which is of type main, but also indicates a speed limit. --Entbert (talk) 17:12, 29 January 2026 (UTC)