Waterstraat en Stelenseweg terug "open" gezet, Pas tussen Zonneke en Dokter Peetersstraat in construction.. Werken duren zeker tot Januari 2021, dus dat is in principe lang genoeg om het in "construction" te zetten

Hello,
I don't remember that I split these footways into small chunks.
I only remember that while I wanted to save my changes at Bd Whitlock I got the question/remark that this footway wasn't "crossing" the Bd Whithock "properly" (no connection or no tunnel or bridge). I added the tag "tunnel" cause I knew for sure it makes part of the underground premetro station "Georges Henri". Tell me if I did something wrong ...

last time I passed by there was 2 months ago ... according to "waze maps" it it still under construction, but I don't know if we can use that as a (reliable) "source" .. survey is in any case needed ...

good question :-) In Brussels you never know for sure if something is permanent or not ... but I think this one will be permanent (cf. small part of Wasmoesberg where the bar Mort Subite is situated)

I passed by there yesterday. The works are finished! I removed the construction tag and I restored the tag bicycle=use_sidepath on the road for cars

dank voor de info. Ik heb alle highways die op construction stonden, terug in hun initiële staat gezet ...

mijn excuses ... ik heb nog niet systematisch de reflex om te kijken naar de geschiedenis :-)
ik zal de surface op basis van de foto, ook al is die van 2017, aanpassen, want ik ben er vrij zeker van dat dit pad niet gebetonneerd is in de tussentijd ...

hallo, is dit pad ondertussen gebetonneerd?
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/rjJxtPMEL47GhqVX3OOp1g

Dag Jo! :-)

Er zijn inderdaad "plannen" om de fietssnelweg tussen Sint-Martens-Bodegem en de grens met Brussel aan te leggen, maar deze zijn nog verre van concreet, laat staan dat er al werken zouden gestart zijn. Ik verwijder dus uw stukken in construction en laat de route lopen over bestaande parallele wegen, als die aanwezig zijn ...

is aangepast!

Dag Pieter,
Bij deze een kleine bedenking:
in de "umap-versie" van OSM viel het me op dat deze paden in het blauw zijn aangegeven: http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/nl/map/potentiele-fietsvoorsorteerstroken_452121#18/50.84631/4.34537

Ik ben gaan kijken bij de tags en ik zag daar staan dat ge zowel bij voetgangers als fietsers "designated" hebt staan.

Er staan effectief geen borden die de toegang tot het park regelen, dus in het extreme geval zouden hier zelfs wagens in mogen; https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/-0rHBhCyURBA5SdJHRKT9g

Maar bon, afgezien hiervan ben ik geneigd te zeggen dat het pad bedoeld is voor voetgangers, dus foot=designated effectief behouden, en dat fietsers toegelaten zijn, maar niet dat ze niet de "norm" zijn hier, dus daarom bicycle=yes ipv designated

Uw gedacht? :-)

thanks for your message! It's indeed surface=sett
I adapted it in the meantime!
by the way I just saw in the wiki that it's also called Belgian block, a pity that it's not retained as a tag.
In any case, thanks again for your feedback. It won't be probably my latest "mistake" you notice, but this last month I learnt a lot! :-)

thx it's clear like that, I deleted the 2 separate ways and added 1 way with the tag "highway=footway" and "footway=crossing" ... can you do a last check?
last thing: I tag the pavement for blind people separately, is it OK like this? -> "highway=footway", "footway=sidewalk" and "tactile_paing=contrasted"

hello, thanks for your message!
for the moment I'm still using the online editor yes ... but I have a meeting pending with Jo Decock to get an introduction to JOSM ... :-)
concerning your comments:
1) I don't understand what you mean with "two separate ways for a crossing" ... or is it that a "crossing" only needs to be tagged as a "node" and not via a "line"?
2) so only "highway=footway" and "footway=crossing"?

Could you give me a good example I can rely on?

hello, I posted your comment in the OSM chat group. Here's the reply from Joost Schouppe: "bxl-forever jumps by here from time to time. If you just say that you think it's a better tag, and that we're working towards replacing all the xx_p tags I don't think there'd be an issue. It sure is nice to have officially approved tags, but it is not obligatory"
In addition to this, the wiki mentions for the traffic sign "F99a" the tag "speed pedelec" and not "moped_p" like for the traffic sign "C3" ...
And as far as I am concernend, I find the tag "speed pedelec" much better and apparently it is in line with neighbouring countires ...

Dag S_Torre,
Is het mogelijk om van dit stuk foto's te nemen en up te loaden op Mapillary?
Ik vermoed trouwens dat de Victor Heylenlei moeilijk "enkel een fietspad" kan zijn, aangezien hier mensen wonen (m.a.w. toegang met auto) dus waarschijnlijk is dit een highway=residential in combinatie met cyclestreet=yes of iets dergelijks ...
Dank om dit te actualiseren.

it is part of my home-office route, so if the speed limit changes after the works, I will modify it ...
Thanks for the comment anyway. I will watch out more carefuly in the future if there aren't conflicting tags ...

enough evidence? :-)
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/OLC-Xi0_2uqcgQz8sDIilw

it is still allowed/possible to walk there!

Hello,
Thanks for your comments.
1) the additions of the statues etc in the parc are based on local knowledge, confirmed by a public and freely distributed map by the municipality. On this map I only see the "responsible editor" which is the "college of mayor and aldermen of Schaerbeek" and the person who effectively edited the map, G. Van Tichelen. If you think there might a problem, what can I/we do?
2) I didn't know about the separator issue "/". I won't use it anymore! And if I still see it somewhere, I will adjust it as well ... :-)