[OSM-talk-be] More cycle routes...

[ivom]

I can agree to tag the routes in Brussels and the ones you are referencing 
from the werkenaanantwerpen sites as lcn. As soon as Brussels starts to 
put the nodes in the network it is easy to change the routes.

>From [3] I noted that the 'Groene Gordel' is supposedly also going to be 
connected to the network in 2010... Is it logical to see the 'Groene 
Gordel' als lcn too for now? Guess so.

As you propose, I would also be in favor to keep the rcn-tag strictly for 
cycle node networks and tag every other cycle-route variation with lcn. My 
gutfeeling is that many cyclable routes or parts thereof are first going 
to converge to the network-style that is currently put in place by several 
Belgian provinces. After that it is very likely that the themed routes are 
again taken and overlayed over them and people have to follow a preset of 
nodes, with some from of additional guide book (paper or electronic).

On Fri, 23 May 2008, Ben Laenen wrote:

> Basically, we need to decide between using lcn (local) or rcn 
> (regional). The pros and cons (add your own):
>
>
> lcn - pro:
> * the ICR-GFR network is similar to the London network, which is tagged 
> with lcn
> * the routes are also local, rcn means it at least can link some cities
> * the themed cycle routes which are now tagged as lcn are sparse in big 
> cities, so less confusion
> * Limburg already decided to remove the themed route signs (since 
> they're superceded by the cycle node network), other provinces may 
> follow, although it now looks like only part of these routes will 
> disappear in the next years. But it nevertheless means that the lcn 
> network gets more sparse, so even less confusion for these in the end.
>
> rcn - pro:
> * Brussels and the direct surrounding municipalities don't have the 
> cycle node network yet like the rest of Flanders, so it wouldn't make 
> confusion (for now, until the cycle node network is extended towards 
> Brussels, see [3] for the original schedule)
>
> rcn - con:
> * it makes sense to completely reserve the rcn tags for the cycle node 
> networks only
>
>
> The third option would be to get a new tag (for either the themed cycle 
> routes now tagged as lcn, or for the ICR-GFR network), but then that 
> needs to get adapted by the renderers who are managed by people in 
> other countries who have to be convinced of the need, etc.
>
> Anyway, let's get some other comments on this once to decide what tag to 
> use. My preference is lcn for ICR-GFR for the reasons given above, but 
> let's hear your ideas on this first.
>
> Greetings
> Ben
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.fiets.irisnet.be/en/cycling_map_en.htm
> [2] http://www.werkenantwerpen.be/gallery.aspx?id=115&pos=4&type=3
> [3] 
> http://jsp.vlaamsparlement.be/docs/schv/2006-2007/BOURGEOIS/42/antw.042.bijl.001.xls
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-be