When you use the cycle map layer in OSM, the bike paths always show up as dashed lines, either blue or brown. Is there any way to make it show as solid lines? I think it would be much easier to see. For example, Google Maps shows solid green lines and I think it is way easier to see.
You can install the rendering tools yourself, and define your own style sheet.
You should note that the cycle map is not produced by OSM, and it looks as though Thunderforest, who do produce it, may use a proprietary style sheet, so it may not be easy to exactly reproduce it starting from open source style sheets. It is also possible that they use some proprietary code to pre-process the map.
However, they do offer a customisation service, at a price, see http://www.thunderforest.com/pricing/
i have just mailed at thunderforest →
Regarding the styling issue, as the cycle map is a loss leader, I imagine it is there because the owner of the company likes cycling, and I imagine the choice of styling reflects his personal preferences.
On the other issue, as far as I know, both cyclemap and transport map derive their routes from OSM, so Thunderbird will not be involved in maintaining the routes. If you know for certain that the route is wrong, without relying on copyright sources (e.g. other bus maps, or time table booklets), you can correct them in the normal way. The best source is actually to make a journey on the bus, but I think it would also be acceptable to walk the route on the ground based on the bus stops…
Maybe OpenRouteService is more “appropriate” for “developing” ?
You mention a route, but a truck does not follow a predefined bus route. For trucks you have to change the max width, width, max weight or max height of the street so they do not get stuck. You do not have to change the bus route. Unfortunately to many GPS systems do not allow the driver to configure the size of her/his vehicle, which leads to such situations even when the underlying data is correct.
BTW, for trucks you have to change the profile in OpenRouteService. Did you do that before calculating the route ?
Also, it is not a general route for buses, it is a route for the number 527 bus. You may find that that bus is actually a minibus.
Also, normal buses aren’t articulated vehicles.
Yes, i knew that… I only mentioned that “truck-accident” to “show” that that street is not suitable for “large vehicles”,… like busses …
In my opinion … there is no bus route on those streets(Grotstraat/Voogdijstraat) … so the “inaccuracy” stays then ?? →
Also, i changed a week ago route 313, because, that route was mapped(long time ago) through O.L.V.straat.
Seems that that street has a bollard →
so, did i do “right” to change that ?
I just “discovered” that site from OpenRouteService , so i have nothing (yet) “done” with it.
Where did you find that info about minibus/normal bus ??
To find out if they use a minibus, you go to the place and look. That’s also how you determine whether the route is valid. I don’t know if they use a minibus or not on that route.
If you are not able to go to the place, the first thing you should probably do is to work out who mapped that piece of road as part of the route, and ask them how they determined it, and whether it is still valid.
Unless you are in a position to verify the route in person, you should not attempt to “correct” it, although you can add a fixme, or use a map note to highlight that it needs checking by someone who is able to visit the location.
LMAO … now i know why those routes are incorrect …
What “problem” would there be, to correct those routes on OSM via online OFFICIAL maps from the bus company ?? →
It depends on the licence under which they’re made available. Some “official” sites do have unexpectedly restrictive licenses.
IANAL, but unfortunately a “revocable license” doesn’t sound ODBL compatible.
IA also NAL, but i am also not a “company”.
If someone from OSM willing to contact bus company De lijn for a free licence ? → https://www.delijn.be/nl/zakelijk-aanbod/reisinfodata/gebruik-onze-data.html
Personal is also a problem, as OSM requires the licence to be a public licence, allowing people who receive the information indirectly to use it, whereas that licence only appears to give permission to the organisation that has signed the agreement.
Also, although you may not be a company, the Open Streetmap Foundation is a company, and they would need to sign the licence agreement. In certain cases they might sign agreements that do give sufficient rights for data to be used in OSM, although I can’t think of a good reason for them to do so, as they cannot bind downstream users of OSM.
(In any case, company is probably being used to indicate anything except a natural person using the information for purely personal purposes, not just a formally incorporated legal person).
Please contact Polyglot for this. He has been talking to De Lijn for years about this and he has signed the necessary paper work.
BTW, The information from De Lijn is often wrong. We have seen bus stops that are misplaced up to 650 meters.
Furthermore, please read the Belgian wiki, e.g. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/De_Lijndata
p.s. It would have been nice that you had started a new thread instead of hijacking this one.
p.p.s. all of this has been discussed in depth on the Belgian mailing list.
This is generally a problem with information from third party sources, especially when, in cases like this, it comes from their marketing department, not from the their operations people.
Consequently, even if the they do decide to release it under a suitable public licence, any details of the routes that were mapped by people on the ground will normally take precedence over what is in the published information, although, again, discrepancies should be used to concentrate effort on surveying that part of the real world.
I totally agree with that, but I doubt that is the case in Belgium. At least in general, the routes are not mapped after a survey, but are based on data from De Lijn. I cannot speak for this particular route though.
OK, but i realise now, that this “bus-thing” is too “complicated” for me.
OK, sorry for that… i “stay off the bus” next time
mailing lists are not “my thing”
tnx for info anyway @ hadw - escada - SomeoneElse