[Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-06-03 12:08, Shaun McDonald wrote:
>> On 3 Jun 2015, at 07:00, Maarten Deen <mdeen at xs4all.nl> wrote:

>> I agree that in every case where oneway=yes is not implied, oneway=no 
>> is superfluous (in a network design way), but that does not make 
>> oneway=no superfluous.
>> 
> 
> There are some cases where oneway=no is useful. For example an area
> where there is lots of one way streets and only a few that are two
> way, adding the oneway=no confirms that the data is correct rather
> than the oneway=yes being missing. Similarly where a street was oneway
> previously and has recently been made two way, this makes it explicit
> that it is now two way in addition to whatever changeset note there
> may be.

Yes, that's why I said "in a network design way". Looking at the data, 
oneway=no is not necessary on any object where it is not implied. 
However, adding it does make clear to people editing the map that it is 
not an omission if surrounding objects are all oneway=yes.

Regards,
Maarten