<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Please, keep in mind that:</p>
<p> - this is a public/private company, with the usual mess, changes
taking years, etc.</p>
<p> - there are relations, and nodes. Two items, allowing for
different approaches, which could be relevant because...</p>
<p> - a relation can span across borders or entities (OSMDoudou's
example ref 4), while nodes are very located in a single entity.</p>
<p>Also, sticking with the old stuff is exactly the problem with
such a public company that takes years to evolve. They slow down
every change because of excessive bureaucracy. I would suggest not
to help the slowness, but favor the improvements, even if they
take years.</p>
<p>On another hand, moving everything to the new OTW naming is 1)
too soon (does not match the reality), and 2) risky since some
political decision could change again the rules before the
previous ones get applied everywhere.</p>
<p>This is the sad reality of bureaucracy, slowness, inefficiency,
but also reality: that's not possible to change all the thousand
documents and references every time a political/CEO decision is
taken... Also, OSM is mapping "reality".</p>
<p>=> Even if on a technical ground I fully support coherency,
thus harmonization throughout the whole data, here we could
quickly face backlashes. Thus I would allow for both naming to
exist, and managing this according to the "reality on the
ground"... With flexible interpretation so as to match a best
compromise. But, indeed, it's less nice on the data coherency
"appearance". (However, it sticks to the principle "OSM maps
reality".)<br>
</p>
<p>My 2 cents.<br>
</p>
<p>++<br>
François<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/01/21 08:01, Jo wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJ6DwMC6ESvmRHhsRr38K4ncgfSeGRTqY3Y_W7UCK51yg0vGqw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">I downloaded their data at <a
href="http://opendata.tec-wl.be/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://opendata.tec-wl.be/</a>
and in both the GTFS and the BLTAC files they still have
separate files for each division and references to stops
prepended with a letter indicating what division it belongs to.
Contrary to De Lijn a single stop can have multiple such
references. I hope they will change this at some point.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jo</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:34
PM Jo <<a href="mailto:winfixit@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">winfixit@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">Actually those refs were never on the
'flags/paddles', I'll have a look at their data, hopefully
it's still available under a free license.
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Jo</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jan 11, 2021,
21:30 OSMDoudou <<a
href="mailto:19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee@gmx.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee@gmx.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Yes,
my reading is that all local TEC names and
companies have merged into the commercial brand
TEC owned by the OTW company. Here is another
article on the matter:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">“</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"
lang="FR-BE">Ce que la réforme prévoit</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"
lang="FR-BE">1. L'intégration des différentes
entités du Groupe TEC dans une nouvelle entité
juridique unique appelée Opérateur de Transport de
Wallonie (OTW). Toutefois, le TEC reste bien la
marque commerciale du Groupe.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">“</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">(<a
href="http://mobilite.wallonie.be/news/fusion-des-tec--la-reforme-est-adoptee"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://mobilite.wallonie.be/news/fusion-des-tec--la-reforme-est-adoptee</a>)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Regarding
your question, I didn’t verify visually on the
road signs, if that was your question.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-be mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>