[Tagging] Implied oneway tag for highway=*_link, wiki edits

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Nov 27 10:11:12 GMT 2009

2009/11/26 Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de>

> All of these tags were previously documented to imply oneway=yes. Now
> only the page for highway=motorway_link still contains that implication.
> Generally, I don't think it's acceptable to change the definitions of
> tags in this way.


> I also wonder how we should deal with this specific situation. Can we
> still assume any default oneway information for *_link values (whether
> it's yes or no) or is oneway=yes/no a required second tag for *_links?
no, IMHO we shouldn't generally "imply" but tag explicitly, otherwise
consistency is at risk.

> Should an application developer decide to assume oneway=no (which might
> lead to longer-than-optimal routing results)

yes, oneway=no is the default for all streets unless explicitly stated. Even
for motorways I wouldn't assume oneway=yes (it could still be that a
motorway is not yet mapped as dual carriage-way).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20091127/bccd02d7/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list