I support this suggestion. If the preserved railway tracks are "rail tracks" (railway=rail) with a "normal" gauge like 1435 mm in germany for example, it would be very good idea to render this (railway=rail + railway:preserved=yes) in the same way like railway=preserved. The OSM community accepted this as a general more actual practic for tagging preserved railways with default-gauge. But this should only be then, if the preserved railway is really "rail", and not something like "tram", "subway" etc.

sorry for bad english

Old one, but I've noticed the above tagging is rendered as the old railway=preserved if the section also have a tunnel tag it seems. Any progress on this problem?

The original tag railway=preserved is still nearly twice as common (~10k vs ~6k), but it has not increased in usage for several years, while railway:preserved=yes is increasing at over 1000 objects per year, so it may become more common in ~2 years.

It would not make sense to render all railway:preserved=yes features the same as a railway=preserved, because several hundred have tags like railway=razed, railway=abandoned, railway=disused and railway=construction: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/RB8

Also, it might be better to render the railway=* style for those that are combined with railway=funicular or railway=miniature.

Should railway=narrow_gauge + railway:preserved=yes be rendered as "narrow gauge" or as "preserved"?

The main case seems to be railway:preserved=yes + railway=rail - which currently renders like a major railway (railway=rail with no service tag). That is misleading.

Combination of railway:preserved=yes and railway values like abandoned, razed and disused are not valid obviously. Construction might be an ok combination if its like a repair of a line like this.
Its supposed to be used on heritage lines that (usually) have seasonal traffic for tourists or for groups that order a trip.
IMO any line like that no matter the gauge should be rendered as a preserved line. It is kind of the reason for the railway:preserved=yes tag, so that the railway=* can be free to describe the rail.
It will visually indicate that it is a heritage/tourist attraction line in operation.

I support this proposal for the reasons stated here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dpreserved#Alternatives_to_railway.3Dpreserved

Being less popular than railway=preserved isn't a reason for it to not be rendered. It clearly has tagging/rendering advantages.

railway:preserved=yes is now the more popular option. A proposal is underway to actively discourage the further use of railway=preserved.

A good start may be to at least render railway=rail + railway:preserved=yes in the same way as as railway=preserved.

I'm interested to know why this request has not been acted upon in over 5 years.

IMO there's no requirement for discussion as the two tagging schemas are for exactly the same feature.

railway=preserved will still be rendered.

railway=rail + railway:preserved=yes is clearly more popular.

https://taghistory.raifer.tech/#***/railway/preserved&***/railway:preserved/yes

Even if it wasn't, rendering it would make no difference as it's the same feature.

It seems illogical to render the same feature two different ways.

I note it's on the "Changes that are possible now we changed the database layout." list.

Funny thing is the rendering works if there is tunnel tag as well. No idea why this is still not fixed...
The old railway=preserved is dying slowly, but as long as carto keep rendering that tag differently it will not die.

I have prepared a pull request to correct the rendering for railway = rail combined with railway:preserved = yes in #4965.