[OSM-talk-be] [Tagging] Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle
OSMDoudou
19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com
Fri Jan 19 18:27:56 UTC 2018
Looking at signs on the ground [8] and legislation [9], R50 classifies as a primary road and not as a trunk, because agricultural vehicles are allowed, whereas the F9 road sign inherently forbids agricultural vehicles.
[8] https://goo.gl/maps/ft7Mf85AuM42
[9] https://www.permisdeconduire-online.be/snelwegwet2.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Gemis [mailto:marc.gemis at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 08:49
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] [Tagging] Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle
We had a similar discussion on the ring around Roeselare on the Riot/Matrix channel.
Maybe it's time we rewrite the Belgian highway classification page to indicate that Nxxx & Rxxx are just indications for mapping and that traffic signs and road importance take precedence ?
m
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 8:44 AM, OSMDoudou <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the link. I hadn't discovered this page yet.
>
> On the other hand, the same page reads "Rx should also be tagged as motorways".
>
> R0 Brussels, R1 Antwerp and R4 Ghent are tagged like that.
>
> But R24 Nivelles, R20 Brussels, R9 Charleroi are tagged as trunks.
>
> And R52 Tournai, R36 Kortrijk and R30 Brugge as primary.
>
> And parts of R23 Leuven are tagged as primary and some other even as secondary.
>
> So, it seems nuance, interpretations and findings from the ground lead to different tagging of R roads.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Gemis [mailto:marc.gemis at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 07:16
> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] [Tagging] Way access mismatch relation
> route=bicycle
>
> I think
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Hi
> ghways gives the solution, there needs to be an F9 sign. If not, it is
> a primary.
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:24 AM, OSMDoudou <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can you help with the B) part of the discussion ?
>>
>> What highway value is suitable for R50 ?
>>
>> Now that I discovered the local implicit characteristics thanks to
>> the answer to question A), trunk is probably right, but I wanted to
>> ask your views nonetheless.
>>
>> Thx.
>> ________________________________
>> From: Volker Schmidt
>> Sent: 18-01-18 09:39
>> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle
>>
>> I suppose Osmose uses the country specific tables in [1] The table
>> for Belgium states that bicycle=no is implicit for "highway=trunk".
>> Hence the short way in question would need to have the additional tag
>> "bicycle=yes" for bicycle routing to pass along that cycle lane.
>> The road signs out there seem to be consistent, there are "no-bicycle"
>> sign along the ring road, except for this short piece.
>>
>> Your second point regarding the road classification trunk is a
>> different issue, that needs to be discussed with the Belgian community.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restr
>> i
>> ctions
>>
>> On 17 January 2018 at 22:45, OSMDoudou
>> <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238eee at gmx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a two-fold question in fact.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (A)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Osmose raises error "Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle" [1]
>>> on a segment of the R50 highway [2] [3].
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm guessing it's because the segment is part of relation for a bike
>>> route but it's tagged as trunk (as the rest of R50), and a trunk
>>> would imply a restriction for bicycles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Although, I see such an implication for motorways [4], I don't see
>>> it for trunks [5].
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you know what causes the access mismatch, because I don't see it
>>> from the tags ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (B)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This issue raises the question whether R50 should be tagged as trunk
>>> in the first place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Wiki page [6] refers to notions like "high performance" and road
>>> signs F9. But the road is limited to 70 km/h and there are no F9
>>> signs on the entries and exits of R50, only C19 "No entry for
>>> pedestrians" and C11 + C9 "No entry for bicycles" + "No entry for
>>> mopeds (and mofas)", which tend to confirm it's not a trunk.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if primary wouldn't be more accurate classification,
>>> although the Wiki refers to a "highway linking large towns" [7],
>>> which is not the case here as the highway is a ring around the city not a road between cities.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What type of road would you qualify the entire R50 ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thx.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/error/15216104253
>>>
>>> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/251684307
>>>
>>> [3] https://goo.gl/maps/khpwvm8kxQw
>>>
>>> [4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway
>>>
>>> [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trunk
>>>
>>> [6] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium
>>>
>>> [7] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dprimary
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
More information about the Talk-be
mailing list