Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be]

 
And don't forget the superroutes. They're still lcn.

StijnRR

 On Thursday, September 3, 2020, 04:55:24 PM GMT+2, Jo  
wrote:  
 
 Yes, I'll look at those as well.
Jo
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:00 PM Yves bxl-forever  
wrote:

Hello,

Thanks for this.

@Polyglot, I saw you updated numbered cycle routes (1 to 12).
The Brussels cycle route network also has 7 routes with letters.  I suppose we 
should apply the same change.
A small circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/237027
B middle circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116569
C large circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7418111 
CC: Canal/Kanaal: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1119347
SZ Senne/Zenne valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116611
MM Maalbeek valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/114235
PP (King’s Palace): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2133184

Cheers.
Yves


On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 10:40:29 +0200
Jo  wrote:

> I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and started
> making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also
> converted them all to rcn.
> 
> Jo
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Joost,
> >
> > In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:
> >
> > lcn: for loops
> > rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn
> > later on
> > ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx
> > cycle highways
> > icn: for European routes going from A to B
> >
> > In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are topologically
> > more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders and Wallonia.
> >
> > I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe 
> > wrote:
> >  
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped
> >> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
> >> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
> >> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
> >> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
> >>
> >> This is also what we say in the wiki:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
> >>
> >> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
> >> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
> >>
> >> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
> >> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
> >> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
> >> changeset description "update")
> >>
> >> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
> >> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
> >> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
> >> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
> >> were mapped.
> >>
> >> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
> >> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
> >> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
> >> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
> >> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
> >>
> >> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
> >> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Joost Schouppe
> >> ___
> >> Talk-be mailing list
> >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> >>  
> >  

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
  ___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[Jo]

Yes, I'll look at those as well.

Jo

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:00 PM Yves bxl-forever 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Thanks for this.
>
> @Polyglot, I saw you updated numbered cycle routes (1 to 12).
> The Brussels cycle route network also has 7 routes with letters.  I
> suppose we should apply the same change.
> A small circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/237027
> B middle circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116569
> C large circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7418111
> CC: Canal/Kanaal: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1119347
> SZ Senne/Zenne valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116611
> MM Maalbeek valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/114235
> PP (King’s Palace): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2133184
>
> Cheers.
> Yves
>
>
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 10:40:29 +0200
> Jo  wrote:
>
> > I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and
> started
> > making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also
> > converted them all to rcn.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Joost,
> > >
> > > In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:
> > >
> > > lcn: for loops
> > > rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and
> rhn
> > > later on
> > > ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the
> Fxxx
> > > cycle highways
> > > icn: for European routes going from A to B
> > >
> > > In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are
> topologically
> > > more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders and
> Wallonia.
> > >
> > > I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.
> > >
> > > Jo
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe <
> joost.schou...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is
> mapped
> > >> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by
> Brussels-the-region,
> > >> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn
> tag. In
> > >> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed
> of
> > >> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
> > >>
> > >> This is also what we say in the wiki:
> > >>
> > >>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
> > >>
> > >> But the example given there (
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
> > >> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
> > >>
> > >> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
> > >> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
> > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
> > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
> > >> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
> > >> changeset description "update")
> > >>
> > >> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better
> changeset
> > >> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but
> I
> > >> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the
> other
> > >> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the
> others
> > >> were mapped.
> > >>
> > >> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
> > >> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping
> -actual-
> > >> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht
> municipality.
> > >> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
> > >> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
> > >>
> > >> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
> > >> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to
> rcn.
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Joost Schouppe
> > >> ___
> > >> Talk-be mailing list
> > >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> > >>
> > >
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[Yves bxl-forever]

Hello,

Thanks for this.

@Polyglot, I saw you updated numbered cycle routes (1 to 12).
The Brussels cycle route network also has 7 routes with letters.  I suppose we 
should apply the same change.
A small circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/237027
B middle circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116569
C large circle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7418111 
CC: Canal/Kanaal: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1119347
SZ Senne/Zenne valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/116611
MM Maalbeek valley: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/114235
PP (King’s Palace): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2133184

Cheers.
Yves


On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 10:40:29 +0200
Jo  wrote:

> I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and started
> making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also
> converted them all to rcn.
> 
> Jo
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Joost,
> >
> > In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:
> >
> > lcn: for loops
> > rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn
> > later on
> > ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx
> > cycle highways
> > icn: for European routes going from A to B
> >
> > In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are topologically
> > more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders and Wallonia.
> >
> > I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe 
> > wrote:
> >  
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped
> >> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
> >> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
> >> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
> >> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
> >>
> >> This is also what we say in the wiki:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
> >>
> >> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
> >> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
> >>
> >> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
> >> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
> >> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
> >> changeset description "update")
> >>
> >> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
> >> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
> >> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
> >> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
> >> were mapped.
> >>
> >> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
> >> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
> >> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
> >> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
> >> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
> >>
> >> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
> >> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Joost Schouppe
> >> ___
> >> Talk-be mailing list
> >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> >>  
> >  

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[joost schouppe]

Thank you Jo!

Op do 3 sep. 2020 om 10:41 schreef Jo :

> I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and started
> making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also
> converted them all to rcn.
>
> Jo
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo  wrote:
>
>> Hi Joost,
>>
>> In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:
>>
>> lcn: for loops
>> rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn
>> later on
>> ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx
>> cycle highways
>> icn: for European routes going from A to B
>>
>> In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are
>> topologically more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders
>> and Wallonia.
>>
>> I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped
>>> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
>>> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
>>> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
>>> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
>>>
>>> This is also what we say in the wiki:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
>>>
>>> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
>>> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
>>>
>>> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
>>> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
>>> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
>>> changeset description "update")
>>>
>>> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
>>> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
>>> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
>>> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
>>> were mapped.
>>>
>>> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
>>> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
>>> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
>>> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
>>> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
>>>
>>> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
>>> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Joost Schouppe
>>> ___
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>>
>> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[Jo]

I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and started
making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also
converted them all to rcn.

Jo

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo  wrote:

> Hi Joost,
>
> In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:
>
> lcn: for loops
> rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn
> later on
> ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx
> cycle highways
> icn: for European routes going from A to B
>
> In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are topologically
> more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders and Wallonia.
>
> I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.
>
> Jo
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped
>> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
>> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
>> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
>> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
>>
>> This is also what we say in the wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
>>
>> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
>> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
>>
>> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
>> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
>> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
>> changeset description "update")
>>
>> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
>> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
>> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
>> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
>> were mapped.
>>
>> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
>> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
>> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
>> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
>> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
>>
>> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
>> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.
>>
>> Best,
>> Joost Schouppe
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[Jo]

Hi Joost,

In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used:

lcn: for loops
rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn
later on
ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx
cycle highways
icn: for European routes going from A to B

In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are topologically
more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders and Wallonia.

I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn.

Jo

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped
> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.
>
> This is also what we say in the wiki:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute
>
> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623
> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn.
>
> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war
> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default
> changeset description "update")
>
> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
> were mapped.
>
> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.
>
> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd
> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.
>
> Best,
> Joost Schouppe
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] regional cycle routes in Brussels

[joost schouppe]

Hi,

I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped as
lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region,
not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In
fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of
several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region.

This is also what we say in the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute

But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623 I
believe), is now mapped as an lcn.

Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war about
this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663
(RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default changeset
description "update")

User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset
comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I
guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other
routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others
were mapped.

Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it
doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual-
lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality.
Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325
Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO.

Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd suggest
we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn.

Best,
Joost Schouppe
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be