Opened 8 years ago

Last modified 2 years ago

#12866 new enhancement

Display disused:railway=* and abandoned:railway=* like railway=disused/abandoned whenever relevant

Reported by: Penegal Owned by: team
Priority: normal Milestone:
Component: Internal mappaint style Version: tested
Keywords: lifecycle prefix display validator Cc:


Hello, there.

The lifecycle prefixes are spreading, but JOSM doesn't really take them into account, which is a shame, as this slows down the correct tagging and modelling using this tagging scheme. The first example which bothers me concerns railways: JOSM should display them like railway=disused/abandoned; of course, not all disused:railway=* and abandoned:railway=* should be rendered this way, only the ones about tracks:

current tag tags to be displayed the same way

This could be applied to other lifecycle prefixes, as construction:railway=* and *:highway=*; I will try to make the list if this is needed or to start the debate if one is required, but these railway tags are the most bothering me, so I start with them. Of course, these lifecycle prefixes should be taken into account in the whole code, for example in the validator, as a partial support would probably accentuate the problem rather than solving it.

I must add that I looked for previous requests regarding the lifecycle prefixes, without results; that surprised me, as this tagging scheme is spreading rather quickly now. I could have simply missed these requests, so don't hit too hard if I failed to locate them…


Attachments (0)

Change History (5)

comment:1 by Klumbumbus, 8 years ago

Component: CoreInternal mappaint style

comment:2 by Klumbumbus, 8 years ago

I'm not really sure about this. Looking at the rail related values of disused:railway=* at taginfo we have:

  • 1706 rail
  • 294 tram
  • 182 narrow_gauge
  • 26 subway

the rest is below 20.
The numbers seem a bit low to me for an established tagging schema of rails. (Compare 75177 railway=disused)

The wikipages also state to use disused:railway together with railway=disused.

So should disused:railway just be an additional optional tag of railway=disused?

Any more opinions?

comment:3 by Penegal, 8 years ago

Well, I asked on the tagging mailing list, and opinions are mixed: some consider that railway=disused is unnecessary when using disused:railway=* — which is my opinion, as it is redundant –, and others consider useful to maintain both tags, either for backward compatibility or by using disused:railway=* like disused=*. Including the new tags in the style in addition of the older ones wouldn't break displaying for anyone, and would even improve it for whose having the first opinion.

comment:4 by Klumbumbus, 6 years ago

see also #16093

in reply to:  2 comment:5 by gaben, 2 years ago


Replying to Klumbumbus:

So should disused:railway just be an additional optional tag of railway=disused?

Any more opinions?

I opt for replacement for two reasons:

  1. Using the above example, railway=disused don't tell anything about the track, or some can say there is information loss by using a JOSM disused track preset (current state).
  2. As a data consumer, there is no added information by using disused:railway together with railway=disused.

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
Set your email in Preferences
as new The owner will remain team.
as The resolution will be set. Next status will be 'closed'.
to The owner will be changed from team to the specified user.
Next status will be 'needinfo'. The owner will be changed from team to Penegal.
as duplicate The resolution will be set to duplicate. Next status will be 'closed'. The specified ticket will be cross-referenced with this ticket.
The owner will be changed from team to anonymous. Next status will be 'assigned'.

Add Comment

E-mail address and name can be saved in the Preferences .
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.