On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Ben Laenen <benlae...@gmail.com> wrote: > To start with: one problem with Brussels is that they don't use road numbers > anymore over there, so there's not much of a classification left. So I'd say > that within the boundaries of Brussels you have some freedom to choose between > primary or secondary.
Yes, I was hoping that the map I linked to could somehow be used as the new official classification for that part of the country, even if I realize that it's just part of a plan of how things "should be in the end". That means if they were to make a new official classification it would most probably be based on this. > Also, the current primary/secondary distinction doesn't play out that well in > some other situations in Belgium either. But we basically lack a better > definition, and using Nxx vs Nxxx is "good enough". Note that other maps one > would call professional, like those from the NGI/IGN use the same system. I agree, but it doesn't work if you want to have good routing options. If you look at Google Maps for instance (and zoom out to see what roads are left), it is far closer to the representation of this map than the one of NGI/IGN. Which is, I guess, based on old specifications. > If you use that map, then you need to have > - red -> primary > - orange -> secondary > - green and blue -> tertiary > > That would be much closer to the OSM classification. Making all the blue ones > secondary will just create a big sea of secondary roads... One could choose > (and maybe it would be even better) to put all the roads managed by the > Brussels-Capital Region that are green or blue on the map as secondary as > well. Then if they decide to merge the municipalities they will suddenly all become secondary roads again :D I think I understand your point as "an inspiration yes, an official reference no". Is that correct? -- Benoit _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
