We followed Pieren's advice on the Talk page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/use_sideway>and made the proposal <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway>much shorter. This focuses on making clear what the proposal is and not so much on our arguments. For those that are interested in our arguments we've made a sub page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway_arguments> including our comment on last proposal. Hope this helps.
With regard to Matthijs his question I can say that in yesterday's newspaper (algemeen dagblad) I read that NL has 35.000 KM of cycleways. Not sure why Matthijs qoute's the "no backward compatibility to the existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL)" . We've commented on that in the proposal (which has moved to the subpage) Cheers PeeWee32 2014-03-17 0:07 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen <i...@matthijsmelissen.nl>: > On 16 March 2014 17:34, Pee Wee <piewi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Last november we proposed the "bicycle=use_cycleway". There was a lot of > > discussion before and during voting. The voting was very close but we > > decided to reject the proposal and work on a new one. > > | no backward compatibility to the existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL) > > Just curious: can anyone find out how many percent of the ways with > highway=cyclepath are located in the Netherlands? It seems Tagwatch > doesn't exist anymore, so I don't really know how to get these data. > > -- Matthijs > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap<http://www.openstreetmap.org> .
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
