JuanjoMC -> for your info: changeset/120081414
I already sent your comment to bxl-forever.
Are you on the chat in matrix? I propose to coordonate as soon as possible ...

I based myself on this example mapped by elucci -> node/9512308318 and by the info in https://app.cycloparking.brussels/parkings
so what's your preference? I don't care so much ...

bicycles can go through! so no need to divert routes ... :-)

reply in the chat van OSM-BE:
"thibaultmol
It's tricky. My personal understanding is: if the ENTIRE building is indeed that amenity, then yes. But if a section of it is a house/living space, or one of the floors of the building isn't that amenity. then you should just use a node
You can never go wrong with using a node
but if truly the entire building is that amenity, it'd tag the entire building

elegant solution from Pietervdv :-) cycleway:width=* + sidewalk:width=*
-> way/33808940

1) thanks for the clarification about the segregated-tag.
2) concerning the standards for roads within parks you have exactly summarised how I think about it! :-)
- at first instance I tagged ways as pedestrian -> paths that "feel" like roads because they are made of asphalt (Parc Josaphat and Parc de Woluwe indeed!)
- But now I am more into this rule -> "roads used by service vehicles" shall become pedestrian, the rest footway or path
highway=pedestrian?uselang=en-GB

hello Jhowie!
Can you re establish the swimming pool 'Flow'? The physical infrastructure is still there and it will open from May on. Thank you in advace - - - https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1158569838237910

relatie van de fietssnelweg verlegd naar Denderstraat en Geraerdtsstraat -> changeset/118675819#map=16/50.9460/4.0350
Dank om hierop te wijzen!

Dag Ivan,
De fietssnelwegen zijn een project van de 5 Vlaamse provincies.
Zij hebben een netwerk uitgetekend van "wenslijnen". Zo'n 50% ligt er al of is nieuw aangelegd. Het andere deel is momenteel nog onbestaande.
Voor bepaalde fietssnelwegen bestaan er al concrete bouwplannen, voor andere is er helemaal nog niets ondernomen (geen bouwvergunning, geen studie etc).
Deze "denkbeeldige brug" maakt deel uit van de wenslijn van de fietssnelweg F27 tussen Aalst en Londerzeel.
Volgens het onderstaande datamodel dat de Belgische OSM-gemeenschap in samenspraak met de Vlaamse provincies heeft opgemaakt, dient deze situatie (zie paragraaf 4) gemapt te worden als "highway=no" + "note=korte beschrijving"
cycle_network=BE-VLG:cycle_highway
Hopelijk is het duidelijk zo. En als er nog vragen zijn, hoor ik het graag!
Gegroet,
Thierry

Monsieur,Madame,
Je rappelle que la politique du projet est de cartographier ce qui est vérifiable sur le terrain.
Un sentier ou une allée de jardin sur un terrain privé doit être cartographié comme highway=path + access=private.
Si l'étiquette "access=private" n'est pas présente, il faut seulement l'ajouter.
Nous n'induisons donc personne en erreur.
Si vous avez d'autres questions ou préoccupations, n'hésitez pas à nous en faire part.
Cordialement,
Thierry Jimenez
Bénévole OSM Belgique

Dag Jowie, de jaagpaden langs het kanaal Halle-Brussel zijn door u hermapt van highway=service naar highway=cycleway, bijv. way/962897136#map=16/50.7805/4.2861
Ik herhaal dat volgens de wiki een jaagpad gemapt dient te worden als highway=track, unclassified of service -> osm.wiki/NL:Jaagpad
Hopelijk is mijn uitleg nu wel duidelijk :-)
Anders hoor ik het graag ...

Dag 'Jhowie_Nitnek',
Volgens de wiki dient een jaagpad gemapt te worden als highway=track, unclassified of service -> osm.wiki/NL:Jaagpad
Alle nieuwe stukken jaagpad (die deel uitmaken van de fietssnelweg F20) tussen Halle en Brussel zijn oorspronkelijk (door Joost Schouppe) gemapt als highway=service.
PS: Zie bord ter plaatse -> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1446773345675975
Gelieve de nodige aanpassingen te doen. Bedankt en fijne dag!

This is my logic:
If there's "space" to park at least one cargo bike (even though is't not a dedicated cargo bike parking) I generally add capacity:cargo_bike=1
If there are (other) rules to calculate it, I'm very willing to know them! :-)

ok thx for your message. I will try to remember to add in the future the road type. And construction=minor I didn't know before. Do you have an idea if routeplanners take it into consideration?

ok thx for mentioning. I will try to make a new picture in the coming days ...

Alban Chambon is the name of the architect ->
https://monument.heritage.brussels/fr/Bruxelles_Laeken/Avenue_de_la_Reine/A001/23267

Hello! Thanks for adding the Pixel Museum!
One remark: the location is not correct. It's on level=-1 + next to 'Fietsatelier MolemBIKE4 -> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=632092798164330

no need to apologize!
Documenting what you're doing and why is more important. At the end, everything can be corrected! :-)
Short reply to your changes:
1) you're completely right about that 'future road' and a bridge 4 meters above :-)
2) the other 'future road' doesn't stop nowhere. It stops at the Flemish-Brussels-border. I know it might sound 'surrealistic' (it actually is!): this cycle highways-project is limited to the borders of Flanders!

cycle_network=BE-VLG:cycle_highway

Hello Fred,
Thanks for your reply and for your action.
One thing you write is not correct.
It's not because a road isn't built yet, that it cannot be part of a cycle route relation.
This cycle route relation 'cycle highway F208' (relation/13192255#map=16/50.7697/4.3089) is a proposed cycle highway by the regional government. It has the tags route=bicycle + state=proposed + note:state=has_highway_no. So in practice it's not yet a bike route where you can cycle, but it's the aim to cycle there in the future.
And in the wiki (please do read section 4) there's an aproved consensus that ways without building permit are mapped as highway=no + note=* Thanks for your cooperation!
Best regards.