Wouldn't the route code be better in a relation? I'm sure there will be some bits of the network which are part of multiple routes.
Why include the word "code" in the tag name for CRS (and nr_route_code) and not for TIPLOC and STANOX? Colin > All, > > I'm part of a group of people who are working to get a richer set of > metadata attached to the railway network in Great Britain, specifically: > > - Tagging railway stations with the three-letter CRS (computer > reservation system) codes, which is widely used by train companies and the > public to refer to stations, plus TIPLOC (TIming Point LOCation) codes - > used in timetable planning - to relevant parts of stations, and STANOX > (Station Number) codes used for train reporting > > - Adding junctions as nodes or closed ways (depending on their > structure) > to existing railway lines, along with their TIPLOC and STANOX codes > > - Adding Network Rail route codes to logical groups of routes and > tidying > up line names > > I've started using three tags - ref:crs_code, ref:stanox and ref:tiploc > for > locations, and ref:nr_route_code for route codes - they're attached to St > Albans Abbey station and stations toward Watford Junction as an example. > > Does anyone have thoughts or comments on the above? I've set up a Wiki > page at > http://wiki.openraildata.info/index.php/AddingJunctionsAndSidingsToOsm and > there's a mailing list at > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openraildata-talk if you want to > get involved. > > > > Peter > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
