Add railway=rail electrification checks

[gaben]

Ways tagged with railway=rail + electrified=no

combined with electrification tags frequency=* or voltage=* should be warned about.

Overpass ​query gives about 3250 ways globally.

[gaben]

railway=rail is the most used tag, but there are a few more:

• construction
• disused
• funicular
• light_rail
• miniature
• monorail
• narrow_gauge
• preserved
• rail (already mentioned)
• subway
• tram

I know @Klumbumbus doesn't like huge rules because of performance reasons, but may worth mentioning :D (Overpass ​returns ~3800 ways, 550 more)

[Famlam]

I know @Klumbumbus doesn't like huge rules because of performance reasons, but may worth mentioning :D (Overpass ​returns ~3800 ways, 550 more)

wouldn't the rule just be:

way[railway][electrified=no][frequency],
way[railway][electrified=no][voltage] {...}

i.e. without having to specify the railway tags?

[gaben]

Can be, but it will include in the check map features like crossings, buildings (ie. roundhouse), stations, stops and so on. Edge cases always possible, but currently there aren't any of them in the OSM database :)

Just to have a full list, with overpass I found a few more mistagged objects:

• abandoned (these may be excluded because the deployed systems probably will not change and worth having the information, 180 occurrences)
• loading_gauge (OK, 1 occurrence)
• pit (OK, 1 occurrence)
• proposed (the warning will be a bit misleading, but OK, 15 occurrences)
• razed (shouldn't have any electrification tags at all?, 21 occurrences)
• track_scale (OK, 1 occurrence)
• waste_disposal (OK, 1 occurrence)

[Famlam]

Replying to gaben:

Can be, but it will include in the check map features like crossings, buildings (ie. roundhouse), stations, stops and so on.

These features wouldn't have the electrified tag, would they? And if they do, electrified=no with frequency or voltage would still be suspicious combinations. (p.s. crossings are nodes and thus not matched by a way selector ;) )

[gaben]

Replying to Famlam:

These features wouldn't have the electrified tag, would they? And if they do, electrified=no with frequency or voltage would still be suspicious combinations. (p.s. crossings are nodes and thus not matched by a way selector ;) )

Yup, true. Just the warning will be a bit odd. JOSM users are probably professional enough to recognize what the devs intended :D

[skyper]

Replying to gaben:

Replying to Famlam:

These features wouldn't have the electrified tag, would they? And if they do, electrified=no with frequency or voltage would still be suspicious combinations. (p.s. crossings are nodes and thus not matched by a way selector ;) )

Yup, true. Just the warning will be a bit odd. JOSM users are probably professional enough to recognize what the devs intended :D

What is wrong with Suspicious tag combination: {0.tag} together with {1.tag} and {2.tag}

Is it worth to leave out voltage=0?

[gaben]

Replying to skyper:

What is wrong with Suspicious tag combination: {0.tag} together with {1.tag} and {2.tag}

We are talking about edge cases, it's fine.

Is it worth to leave out voltage=0?

I think no because voltage=0 means there is some sort of electrification (equipment is there), but currently isn't working. So electrified=no + voltage=0 is a suspicious combination. At least this is what I can came up with. Anyway, it affects only 5 ways in the whole database (4017 vs 4022).

[Klumbumbus]

In 17025/josm:

fix #19747 - Warn about electrified=no together with voltage or frequency on railway ways, add frequency=25 to presets

[Klumbumbus]

In 17026/josm:

see #19747 - Fix sorting of frequency values in presets