[OSM-talk-be] ravel Brussels-Charleroi

Mon Jun 27 18:23:50 UTC 2022

Hi,

A month ago I surveyed the Ravel n°3 from Ronquières till rue de Nivelles -
chaussée de Marche

The occasion was the fantasy I discovered in this relation:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11048468

Cyclists usually don't climb up walls 30m high.

I deleted non existing links around central building:

I differentiated between cycleways and paths mostly following the Ravel
signs. Some parts of those non-Ravel paths are asphalted but are no
cycleway in the sense that they lead to nowhere.

E.g. the asphalt paths near the buildings are popular for letting out the
dogs.

The actual Ravel is designed following the road conditions, it takes the
best, asphalted ways.

This means, it doesn’t always follow the towpath but sometimes a parallel
asphalted road.

On the Ravel site https://ravel.wallonie.be/home/carte-interactive.html

the name "W3 La Véloroute des Carnavals" is still in use.

On the signs along the canal, this inscription is not used (anymore).

Only “3  Canal Charleroi Bruxelles” is used.

I checked my pictures and my memory and its correspond with the Ravel as it
is drawn on the Ravel website.

The Ravel signs seem rather recent and correspond with the "3" on the Ravel
website.

On OSM the are two relations defined

- Relation RAVeL W3 Véloroute des Carnavals

- Relation Ravel Canal Charleroi-Bruxelles

I’m not going to correct the relation 11048468.

Relations are not (yet) my cup of tea.

But indeed the Ravel needs some correction.

Kind regards

Raf

Op ma 27 jun. 2022 om 13:17 schreef joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com
>:

> Hi Gerard,
>
> The F20 has been mapped, according to the data model for cycle highways
> that was also discussed here, see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycle_network%3DBE-VLG:cycle_highway
>
> While it makes sense to harmonize the tagging across the regions, the
> name, the references and even the concept differs from region to region. So
> having a single relation is not a good idea. In the case of GR routes,
> which are clearly a single concept, these are also split aling countries
> and regions, because some tags (i.e. operator) doe change at the borders.
> Maybe something can be said for also creating superroutes unifying some
> relations. But I haven't seen much unification between the cycle highway
> network in Flanders and the ravel in Flanders. For Brussels and Flanders,
> this is a little different. Here for example, it seems that the logic will
> be that you have an F20 in Flanders which seamlessly continues as a C20 in
> Brussels. Again, not mappable as a single relation, but could be unified in
> a superrelation.
>
> Op ma 27 jun. 2022 om 11:53 schreef ghia <ghia at ghia.eu>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Maybe it should not be called Ravel all the way, but I assume this is
>> part of the supra regional project of bicycle highways (see F20
>> <https://fietssnelwegen.be/fietssnelwegen/F20> part of Flanders).
>>
>> There are also others in planning and/or execution:
>>
>>
>> https://www.dhnet.be/regions/bruxelles/bruxelles-mobilite/deux-corridors-cyclables-pour-connecter-le-brabant-wallon-a-bruxelles-voici-le-programme-des-amenagements-62a21e09d8ad5865ff65514a
>>
>>
>> https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2022/05/17/fietspad-door-zonienwoud-in-brussel-krijgt-upgrade/
>>
>>
>> https://www.bruzz.be/mobiliteit/hoe-cyclostrades-de-pendelaar-van-autoverslaving-moeten-afhelpen-2022-03-24
>>
>>
>> https://www.werkenaandering.be/nl/werken-aan/fietsinfrastructuur/fietssnelweg-f205
>>
>> I would say that one general relation would be better than 3 regional
>> parts, so the edit should be reversed.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Gerard
>>
>> On 2022-06-27 11:04, joost schouppe wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I recently stumbled upon
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/121485907 , which extended a
>> Ravel all the way to Brussels, along both sides of the canal. Upon
>> confirmation that it wasn't based on survey and other confirmation that
>> Ravel don't go outside of Wallonia normally, I have removed the part in
>> Brussels and Flanders: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122897767
>>
>> However, the part in Wallonia is still mapped systematically at both
>> sides of the canal, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11048468
>> Mapillary coverage is not good enough to check systematically where it
>> goes. Anyone have some knowledge of the ravel? Anyone willing to fix? Or
>> could you provide information about on which sections it goes on which side?
>>
>> Best,
>> Joost Schouppe
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
> <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20220627/34975e51/attachment-0001.htm>