[OSM-talk-be] Question regarding Cycle node networks tagging.

[Sander Deryckere]

I've edited another crossing of the route (some strange politicians are in
charge of the traffic in Roeselare). So now it should be correct.

Thanks for your help.

2012/5/11 Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>

> There is a way to keep it in one relation, if understood the issue
> correctly:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1632662
>
> ways can be members of relations multiple times. This happens often in bus
> routes, even when both directions are mapped in separate relations. Just
> look at some of the relations around the railway station of Leuven.
>
> I think the cycle route itinerary is OK now, even though it's quite absurd
> to send a bicycle around like that, when the cyclist could just as well get
> off and become a pedestrian for a few meters.
>
> Jo
>
>
> 2012/5/11 Sander Deryckere <sanderd17 at gmail.com>
>
>>  Hi, I just found out how a certain part of the node network is
>> implemented. See the link below to have an overview:
>>
>>
>> http://openfietskaart.nl/?zoom=14&lat=50.93426&lon=3.12985&layers=000B0FFFFFTF
>>
>> The issue is the route between 76 and 77. The route from 76 to 77 is
>> correctly mapped. But if you look at the map data of the crossing between
>> the Zuidstraat and the Paterstraat (near kpt 77), you see that there are
>> turn restrictions (which apparently also counts for bicycles).
>>
>> So when you go from 77 to 76, you first have to go to the north on the
>> crossing with the Zuidstraat. Then you follow the Grote Markt, Manestraat,
>> Vrouwenstraat, Sint-Michielsplein and afterwards, you turn again into the
>> Zuidstraat, but this time you take it in the south direction.
>>
>> I think it's not possible to get all this info in one relation without an
>> ambiguous route (since the Zuidstraat is taken twice for the route in one
>> of the directions).
>>
>> So should I split this in a 76-77 and a 77-76 route? Or is there an other
>> way that would be supported by most tools that use those relationships now?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sander
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20120511/5a7742c1/attachment.htm>