We have more recent AGIV imagery now. All I see wrong is that the cycleway
is connected to the underground waterway. But the main road is too.
Probably to silence validator warnings in a totally inappropriate way...
I still think it's correct to draw the cycleways separate cases like this.
Marc,
Jo,
a can of worms ? I hope it , this mailing list is too quiet :-)
Wouter,
While I understand that for routing one does not need the separate
cycleways, I don't see much difference in a router that sends me over the
N47 with separate cycleways (illegal in your eyes) or without separate
Hallo,
Ik vraag me af of het OK is het volgende kruispunt te vereenvoudigen via
turn:lanes : http://osm.org/go/0Ejo5_fqb--?way=51738440
I wonder whether it's ok to simplify the following crossing with turn:lanes
tagging: http://osm.org/go/0Ejo5_fqb--?way=51738440
met vriendelijke groeten
Zeker wel, het klopt niet om een aparte weg te tekenen voor elk rijvak.
Absolutely, using a separate way to represent traffic lanes is not how it's
supposed to be done.
Jo
2014-05-13 5:48 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com:
Hallo,
Ik vraag me af of het OK is het volgende kruispunt
