It is true that the cycle highways form some sort of a network. macro view at least. When I was trying to map them in OSM, it was often tricky to find a single spot that could be considered a node where they connect.
Around Gent, mapping F40 as a single continuous cycle highway is a challenge. There is also quite often some overlap. In Bilzen there is an actual gap on F76. Jo On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:43 PM s8evq <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, after reading the wiki pages, `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway` > seems indeed the best choice here. > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:45:39 +0100 (CET), "s8evq" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 18:35:51 +0100, Pieter Vander Vennet < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > *Tagging scheme* > > > > > > I'd actually go for `cycle_network=BE:cycle_highway`, as cycle_network > > > normally has a country prefix. Because most (all?) of them are already > > > tagged, we could simply update the tagging all at once. I'll do that > > > next week, unless a better proposal or good reason not to is raised. > > > > > > Concerning the tagging, would perhaps the new tag "network:type" be of > any help? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:network:type It was > invented for the use with value node_network, but could perhaps take other > values? > > > > If we can be critical? What makes a "Fietssnelweg" different from > another long distance route like LF5 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5285 Only the operator key? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-be mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
