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 <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
