Forum:Federal States/Mapping in Vacant States: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "<div class="forumheader" style="margin: 1; background-color: #eeeeee; text-align: left; padding: 5px;">'''Forums → Federal States...") |
(Fixing link) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- Write below this line, please. --> | <!-- Write below this line, please. --> | ||
As of 18 May 2022 there over a dozen vacant FSA states, most of them have left-over mapping from previous owners. We currently have a policy regarding [ | As of 18 May 2022 there over a dozen vacant FSA states, most of them have left-over mapping from previous owners. We currently have a policy regarding [[Collab:Federal_States/Railways/Companies#Vacant_States|railways that cross vacant states]]. It sets out the framework for creating new railway lines and incorporating pre-existing lines into new routes. It tries to balance the need for national rail planning against the freedoms of new mappers. <br> | ||
The vacant states often have roads and motorways left behind by their previous owners. While most are unimportant, some routes link between active states and are significant nationally. ''Should we extend the railway policy to include significant roads and motorways?'' <br><br> | The vacant states often have roads and motorways left behind by their previous owners. While most are unimportant, some routes link between active states and are significant nationally. ''Should we extend the railway policy to include significant roads and motorways?'' <br><br> | ||
Revision as of 12:33, 18 May 2022
As of 18 May 2022 there over a dozen vacant FSA states, most of them have left-over mapping from previous owners. We currently have a policy regarding railways that cross vacant states. It sets out the framework for creating new railway lines and incorporating pre-existing lines into new routes. It tries to balance the need for national rail planning against the freedoms of new mappers.
The vacant states often have roads and motorways left behind by their previous owners. While most are unimportant, some routes link between active states and are significant nationally. Should we extend the railway policy to include significant roads and motorways?
Other things to consider might be.. Would this benefit current mappers and the FSA project or would it be too restrictive on the freedoms of future participants? How do we decide which routes fall under the policy? Who makes the final call?
We'd like to hear your opinions. Ruadh (talk) 08:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)