Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bewegwijzerde fietssnelwegen

2016-05-31 Thread Wouter Hamelinck
1. If you want to create a new tag, make sure that there is a very, very, very good reason to do so. The reason should be good enough for the whole world to follow your example. 2. I totally fail to see why the fietssnelwegen would be another level than LF, RV or RAVeL. Especially RAVeL is very sim

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bewegwijzerde fietssnelwegen

2016-05-31 Thread Jo
If we need a fifth level, next to icn, ncn, rcn and lcn, we will have to propose one, so hopefully it gets rendered soon(ish). I think that's what this proposal is about. I agree provincial doesn't make a lot of sense. I think the real question is, do we need just a fifth level or a sixth one as we

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bewegwijzerde fietssnelwegen

2016-05-31 Thread mgwebmail
Hey, What about asking/looking other countries to learn how they do it ? We are certainly not pioneer of this kind of cycle way. Provincial looks also pointless to me : that's a "political" border, not meaningful from the OSM point of view in this case. I must admit however that in Belgium on