Talk:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging in North America
- I believe the author is User:YamaOfParadise. You may wish to make contact and suggest this as I'm not sure a Talk entry will get this person's attention. I've tried contact directly (OSM missive) but have yet to receive a response. You might also try to do the vectorizing yourself, as I agree that svg files are better for these sorts of data. Then again, it may be a not-especially-worthwhile endeavor, as the graphics work is already done, yet it isn't in the most appropriate format.
(From this talk-us thread).
I realize that distinctions between railway=rail + usage=* tags is subjective (even as OpenRailwayMap — ORM — renders main orange and branch yellow). Full disclosure: I have tried to sharpen focus in contributing to our ORM Tagging wiki and related wiki re OSM rail tagging. I am in a listening mode as I do so and don't wish to be too aggressive in positing anything too new or too controversial.
I have not done a comprehensive review of how many Class II railroads (a category of regional railroad in the USA which is not usually as "short line" as Class IIIs, but neither is it as large as the mighty Class Is) are tagged usage=main vs. usage=branch. I now toss out as a question in the USA (Overpass Turbo can query) a wider beginning of consensus regarding Class II railroads being tagged usage=main instead of usage=branch. In short, all discussion is welcome: calling all interested parties.
Starting with Central Oregon and Pacific (reporting mark CORP) now tagged usage=branch, might this better be tagged usage=main? Should other USA Class II railroads be tagged usage=main as a matter of course? I'm leaning in that direction, suggesting that CORP and other Class II railroads see usage=* tags become main (if not main, be changed from branch to main).
Comments? This includes soliciting Comments from overseas readers, like in Germany...those who wrote the ORM renderer and "watch" (and at least pay attention) to such things. (The concept of "Class II" railroad might literally be a foreign concept, but I believe European, Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, Korean, pan-Asian, African, Australian, South American...all worldwide OSM rail mapping watchers can understand Class II in the context of "USA Rail"): these are "medium/regional-sized" railroads, measured economically by revenue as "between large interstate carriers and short line/more-local carriers."
If you are a rail fan / rail buff or otherwise find OSM rail-useful, please consider chiming in here and now as a way to better establish a modicum of sub-community (OSM-US rail interest). I have heard from many over the years and consider hearing from others a polite nod in this direction. I also welcome all others and all "new comers" (from my limited perspective) — those with whom I have no idea you are "out there." Thank you. Stevea (talk) 16:22, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Is the CORP a Class II railroad? The list on Wikipedia is a complete mess, and I couldn't find a list of Class II and III railroads on the STB website. When I found a local news source for the CORP line reopening, the article said the CORP was a Class III railroad. In either case, I don't believe it currently has the traffic needed to warrant usage=main. There are some Class II railroads whose mainlines should be tagged as such, like Alaska, Iowa Interstate, Long Island, and Florida East Coast. I think the tagging of Class II railroad mainlines should be done on a case-by-case basis. -happy5214 01:14, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Nice to hear from you, old friend! I don't recall exactly from where I determined that CORP is Class II, though I do recall at least two different sources that said this. Yet I've also seen some California (Department of Transportation) documentation that calls it Class III. However, I agree with you on all points: that traffic likely doesn't warrant usage=main on CORP, that the Class II's you list are "significantly major rail" that DOES warrant usage=main and that these decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis. Thanks for your input here, especially as others might find this talking point and act accordingly in the future. Stevea (talk) 17:03, 17 June 2018 (UTC)