OpenStreetMap

Hi!

Please don't use man_made=rails - it should be tagged as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=disused instead.

Thank you

Please don't use railwail=disused for just rails - there isn't any tram network and there are no disused tram lines on these streets. Just remnants of very old tram lines, shut down 30-40 years ago.
From wiki: "A section of railway which is no longer used but where the track and infrastructure remain in place."
There is no infrastructure there. No tram will go by these line. No connection with rest of the network, no power infrastructure.

Well, one could argue how much infrastructure should remain in order for the tracks to be considered 'disused' and not 'abandoned'. My point is that the rails are the most important part and since they are still present, they should be tagged (as they are useful for navigation purposes; they still represent the cycling hazard, etc).

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=rails is not used at all - it's better to stick to the already existing tagging schemes. Unfortunately there is nothing there between 'disused' and 'abandoned', but due to the reasons above (and since 'abandoned' means complete absence of the rails) I recommend sticking to 'disused' value.

Lack of connectivity with the active tram railway in the city and absence of electrical power infrastructure makes railway=disused wrong key for this as this for sure isn't compliant with wiki definition and with common sense.
Note that in osm you can freely invent and use new tags, so there is nothing wrong with my man_made=rails.
Because you don't like this tagging, I will use railway=abandoned, as it is much more close to what's on the ground than railway=disused.

Yep, any tag you want, but still it does not mean that we should not try to have order in what we do. If every single person starts using their own set tags, the map would be useless...

Anyway, the problem with railway=abandoned is that does not fit either =( as it clearly states that 'the rails have been removed', which is clearly not our case.

Well, I've raised this topic on the forum - let's see what others think: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=62624