On 2013-10-03 05:47, Marc Gemis wrote:
2013/10/2 Gilbert Hersschens <[email protected]>:
Ik denk dat de foto bij
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway duidelijk is. Een
bord C3 met onderbord is niet hetzelfde als een bord D7.
Via deze pagina vond ik
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Belgium
Kent iemand die pagina ? Een van de uitspraken is bv. dat designated
niet nodig in België is.
"There's no reason for a "designated" access tag in Belgium as there
is no reason why one has more rights over the other on any of these
highway types when different vehicle types have access to a road.
"designated" is therefore synonym with "yes". Footways could both be
signed with a sign that doesn't show a pedestrian at all, and one that
does, so basing a designated tag on traffic signs is also flawed."
-----
English Version
From the page mentioned by Gilbert, I discovered
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Belgium.
It states e.g. that the key designated is useless in Belgium:
"There's no reason for a "designated" access tag in Belgium as there
is no reason why one has more rights over the other on any of these
highway types when different vehicle types have access to a road.
"designated" is therefore synonym with "yes". Footways could both be
signed with a sign that doesn't show a pedestrian at all, and one that
does, so basing a designated tag on traffic signs is also flawed."
Sorry, maar met die logica volg ik niet. Met onderbord voor C3 beter te
bepalen erbij moet je toch voor 'destination' kiezen. Ik vind deze
bepaling voor 'designated' wat kort door de bocht.
Glenn
_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
