Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hey everyone, a lot of the cycling highways are listed : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Cycle_Routes#Vlaanderen including the mapt relation and a status jul2 ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 23:07 Pieter Vander Vennet wrote: > Hey everyone, > > After some silence in this thread, I would like to close it with a small > wrap-up. > > As the consensus is clear, I've created a wiki page describing the tag in > detail >

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hey everyone, After some silence in this thread, I would like to close it with a small wrap-up. As the consensus is clear, I've created a wiki page describing the tag in detail . Feel free to update, add or correct on this

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

On 26.12.19 11:16, EeBie wrote: > I am checking  some cycling highways with status proposed and keep the > parts that are released as usable (Befietsbaar) in the relation and > delete the status proposed to make them visible and usable in > routeplanners. > I experienced that the information on

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

I am checking  some cycling highways with status proposed and keep the parts that are released as usable (Befietsbaar) in the relation and delete the status proposed to make them visible and usable in routeplanners. I experienced that the information on the website Fietssnelwegen.be is not

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hi Jo, I think that's the right thing to do, thank you. What I'm still a bit unclear about: if the route itself is unfinished, but large sections of them are, then I would think the finished parts do deserve a "ready for use state". We talked about this briefly before, maybe someone here has an

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

All the figments of my imagination have been removed. I reviewed the remaining ones, and fixed them here and there. Where it's not possible to use them today to get from the start till the end, they are marked as state=proposed. Jo ___ Talk-be mailing

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

I would assume that something like cycle.travel will compute a bicycle-friendly route for the missing parts if all streets are mapped properly with max speed, cycleways, surfaces, etc. There is indeed no need/justification to map personal preferences/suggestions. If the routes calculated by

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Go ahead, they are not important to me. I was trying to create itineraries that get you from one place to another today, instead of in 5 or 10 years. I like to see bicycle routes that are continuous. That is usually not possible today on any of the fietsnelwegen. Jo On Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 23:40

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

I agree with the remarks of Stijn. Only the parts of the "Fietssnelwegen" that are realized and “Befietsbaar” on the website of Fietssnelwegen and/or marked in the field as such, should be on OSM as cycle route. During the past 2 years I suffered several times from the unreliable information

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hi, I don't understand why nobody else objects to the 'alternatives'. They're just somebody's personal inventions, but they do not exist. If we allow Jo's alternatives, then we have to allow anybody's alternatives, suggestions , etc. for cycle highways or any other kind of hiking, cycle, ...

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Nice! Good to hear that! On 11.12.19 10:32, Lionel Giard wrote: > To answer Joost question about relevance in other regions : yes it is > relevant. Wallonia recently started to plan and implement these "cycle > highway" to reach Brussels from multiple different locations (with > protected

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hey Marc, For clarity, the idea is to create a relation which represents a cycle highway, such as (for example) this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10139557 We will _not_ add extra tags on the individual way segments. I had a quick look to the E40-motorway somewhere. On that, there

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

It is true that the cycle highways form some sort of a network. macro view at least. When I was trying to map them in OSM, it was often tricky to find a single spot that could be considered a node where they connect. Around Gent, mapping F40 as a single continuous cycle highway is a challenge.

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Brussels too is planning to extend the Fxxx toward the center. Of course, they'll use a C instead of an F, but as far as I understood, they are planning to use the same numbers, so F3 becomes C3 at the border of the Brussels region. On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:33 AM Lionel Giard wrote: > To

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

To answer Joost question about relevance in other regions : yes it is relevant. Wallonia recently started to plan and implement these "cycle highway" to reach Brussels from multiple different locations (with protected cycleway along motorway, national road or railway). They want to connect and

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

> Tagging scheme > > I'd actually go for `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway`, as cycle_network > normally has a country prefix. Because most (all?) of them are already > tagged, we could simply update the tagging all at once. I'll do that next > week, unless a better proposal or good reason not

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Actually, after reading the wiki pages, `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway` seems indeed the best choice here. On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:45:39 +0100 (CET), "s8evq" wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 18:35:51 +0100, Pieter Vander Vennet > wrote: > > > *Tagging scheme* > > > > I'd actually go for

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 6:35 PM Pieter Vander Vennet wrote: > Hello Jo, > > Thanks for the informative answer which offers a very informed view and > for your many contributions. > > I'll break it up onto multiple subtitles, as there are some sub-topics > emerging. > > *Tagging scheme* > > I'd

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 18:35:51 +0100, Pieter Vander Vennet wrote: > *Tagging scheme* > > I'd actually go for `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway`, as cycle_network > normally has a country prefix. Because most (all?) of them are already > tagged, we could simply update the tagging all at once.  I'll

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hello Jo, Thanks for the informative answer which offers a very informed view and for your many contributions. I'll break it up onto multiple subtitles, as there are some sub-topics emerging. *Tagging scheme* I'd actually go for `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway`, as cycle_network normally has a

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hi Pieter, You are right, that is an odd way of tagging them. cycle_highway seems better indeed. I don't know who started doing it that way, I simply continued the practice, without giving it enough thought. Most of these cycle highways can't be cycled from beginning to end, they continue over

[OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

Hello everyone, As we (Anyways BVBA) are making a route planner which takes 'Fietssnelwegen' into account, we would like to have some uniform tagging into place for this. Some of them are already tagged with `cycle_network=Fietssnelweg`, which sounds very Flemish. I'm going ahead with adding