[Tagging] trees and waterways

Elizabeth Dodd edodd at billiau.net
Tue Sep 14 09:36:45 BST 2010


On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:49:54 +0200
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:

> > No, that's exactly the same as 'oneway=no' on two-ways roads. When
> > the tag is not present, we assume that the road is two ways. That's
> > it. If it's wrong, then fix it by adding the oneway tag.
> > It is the same for waterways and the direction of the way. If it's
> > wrong, then reverse the direction of the way with your prefered
> > editor. We have similar conventions for the coastline, we don't
> > have/need a tag saying which side is the land and which side is the
> > water and nobody complains.  
> 
> 
> +1, there is also other similar conventions like
> barrier=retaining_wall.


This is detailing tags which have two parts to their meanings. Really
this is a form of shorthand which is convenient for those who know the
code, and not to those who don't comprehend the 'code'. What sort of a
difference does this make to the computed use of the data? We can only
make a decision on whether these conventions continue when we
understand how it affects the data use.
There are good arguments each way for the input of the data.



More information about the Tagging mailing list