[OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

[Pieter Vander Vennet]

Hey everyone,

After some silence in this thread, I would like to close it with a small
wrap-up.

As the consensus is clear, I've created a wiki page describing the tag
in detail
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycle_network%3Dcycle_highway>.
Feel free to update, add or correct on this page. Additionally, I've
added links and updated tagging on a few wiki pages where I encountered
the old tagging.


Secondly, I would wish to thank Polyglot for his extensive work on the
mapping of these cycle networks and to already execute the changes
described here!

Thirdly, I would like to thank everyone involved for all the ideas and
the constructive way everything was discussed!

Kind regards & best wishes for 2020,
Pietervdvn



On 26.12.19 11:16, EeBie wrote:
> I am checking  some cycling highways with status proposed and keep the
> parts that are released as usable (Befietsbaar) in the relation and
> delete the status proposed to make them visible and usable in
> routeplanners.
> I experienced that the information on the website Fietssnelwegen.be is
> not 100% correct. There are parts released where no bike access is
> allowed. I leave these parts out and also the parts over unpaved paths
> that are difficult for usual bikes.
>
> Eebie
>
> Op 25/12/19 om 13:14 schreef joost schouppe:
>> Hi Jo,
>>
>> I think that's the right thing to do, thank you. 
>>
>> What I'm still a bit unclear about: if the route itself is
>> unfinished, but large sections of them are, then I would think the
>> finished parts do deserve a "ready for use state". We talked about
>> this briefly before, maybe someone here has an idea how to split up
>> the route (say F3) in three types of subrelations :
>>
>> - usable, ready and waymarked (so similar to any "normal" cycle route)
>> - usable but not ready or waymarked (here the route is proposed, I'd say)
>> - unusable (here the ways themselves are proposed)
>>
>> As stated by Stijn and Eebie, the connections "invented" by Jo don't
>> belong in OSM. However some of these detours are in fact waymarked.
>> For example, in the cycle highway Brussel-Halle there is an official
>> detour that will be in place for two years. I'm not sure if this kind
>> of situation needs to ge in a fourth type...
>>
>> Joost
>>
>> Op di 24 dec. 2019 10:57 schreef Jo <winfixit at gmail.com
>> <mailto:winfixit at gmail.com>>:
>>
>>     All the figments of my imagination have been removed. I reviewed
>>     the remaining ones, and fixed them here and there. Where it's not
>>     possible to use them today to get from the start till the end,
>>     they are marked as state=proposed.
>>
>>     Jo
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Talk-be mailing list
>>     Talk-be at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20200106/21cf55f8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pietervdvn.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20200106/21cf55f8/attachment.vcf>