[OSM-talk-be] We have permission to add the cycle node routes around Famenne to Openstreetmap.org

[Jo]

When I started looking more thoroughly at cycle node networks a few years
ago, I noticed other people in Belgium and The Netherlands had already
added route relations to network relations, so I proceeded to continue that
practice. I must admit I never consulted nor updated the wiki. When walking
node networks started to mushroom, we all continued in the same vein.

Then I read somewhere about type=collection relation and collected all
Belgian network cycle node relations together in one of those. I don't
think this ever became 'official' either.

Before we had Overpass API, this was the most convenient way to download
all of them in a few relatively simple steps in JOSM.

Feel free to update the wiki or to suggest Lonvia to make use of this
information in their renderings.

Jo

2013/3/12 A.Pirard.Papou <A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com>

>  On 2013-02-21 07:08, Jo wrote :
>
> That was great news indeed, and great follow-up indeed, thanks.
>
>>  But if we click here<http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=12&lat=50.52357&lon=5.63117>,
>> look at the map and then click on *Routes*. and on some routes.
>> And then click here<http://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=11&lat=50.22721&lon=5.35737>,
>> and do the same again
>> Doesn't it seem that these organizers deserve better thanks and
>> advertising?
>> Same here and around<http://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=11&lat=50.92581&lon=4.98478&route=1>in many places, BTW.
>>
>
> The numbered node networks are networks of routes. Very many relatively
> short routes. The information you seem to be looking for can be found at
> the network level. It is the same for all the routes which belong to the
> same network, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to repeat it in each and
> every route relation.
>
> It would be a lot better that Lonvia gets this information from the
> network relation and shows that, instead of burdening the OSM DB with the
> same string about 15000 times.
>
> My provider's anti-spam filtering decided I should not receive your e-mail
> :-(  You're perfectly right and that makes the most stupid article I ever
> read, Relations are not Categories<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories>,
> perfectly wrong.
> But the network information is impossible to find.  Click in route in
> Lonvia and get this in the browser
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2649063  and then click Pays
> de Famenne à vélo <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2567359>in it.
> Not to be expected from any user and I hope you will warn Lonvia indeed.
>
> But regarding type=network, I see that mentioned nowhere in the wiki.
> WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes>or anywhere.
> wiki/Relations/Proposed/Network<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Network>says to be proposing tags but I see no tags it proposes.
> Not to be expected from the mapper either if he doesn't find what he must
> do.
>
> Now, should I add my hiking routes to a network and which and how?
> I was scolded in the past for doing the same as what I saw being done
> (boundaries) and I promised to myself that I won't do anything more that's
> not the wiki.
>
> BTW of 15000 times: have you seen this on almost every French *node*?
> *source*: cadastre-dgi-fr source : Direction Générale des Impôts -
> Cadastre. Mise à jour : 2012
> as it a way could have a different source as its nodes.
>
> Cheers,
>
>   André.
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130312/60ff365d/attachment.htm>