This mailing list has been migrated to Mailman 3. This archive will no longer be updated. Messages after 1 February 2020 are missing. Please use the new archive instead.
Diese Mailingliste wurde auf Mailman 3 umgestellt. Dieses Archiv wird nicht mehr länger aktualisiert. Nachrichten nach dem 1. Februar 2020 fehlen. Bitte benutze das neue Archiv.
Hi Eduard, we removed usage=freight because it did not fit into the other values of usage=*. This tag classifies the type of a track, but freight describes by which type of trains a track is used. It also means redundancy with railway:traffic_mode=freight. For example, we need a possibility to decide between the public network and industrial railways inside steel mills or mining areas. If there was just usage=freight for both ones, it would not be possible to render them in a different style. So it is necessary to tag industrial railways as usage=industrial to be able to distinguish them from the public network. For the public railway network, it is necessary to distinguish between main lines and branch lines. That collides with usage=freight: If a public line which is used just by freight trains (there are some cases in Germany), it would not be possible to mark it as an main or branch line. That is why there is the additional tag railway:traffic_mode=*. I hope you were able to follow my example... ;) Regards Alex Am Dienstag, den 15.12.2015, 18:41 +0300 schrieb Eduard (edward17): > - Need an English version? Just scroll down - > > > > Hallo zusammen, > > in diesem OSM-Wiki-Änderung wurde der Tag usage=freight mit dem > Kommentar "removed deprecated usage=freight" weggenommen: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:usage&diff=121143 > 8&oldid=1161677 > > Ich habe nichts dagegen, ich möchte nur die Ursache wissen. Vielleich > habe ich Diskussion darüber darchgelassen. > > Viele Grüße > Eduard <edward17> > > --- > > Hi there, > > in this OSM-Wiki-Change usage=freight tag had been deleted: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:usage&diff=121143 > 8&oldid=1161677 > > I'm not opposed, but I only want to know the reason. Probably I > missed the discussion. > > Best regards > Eduard <edward17> > _______________________________________________ > Openrailwaymap mailing list > Openrailwaymap at openrailwaymap.org > http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/lists/listinfo/openrailwaymap -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/archives/openrailwaymap/attachments/20160103/0360fbe2/attachment.sig>