[Tagging] Use of oneway=yes on waterways

Dave F davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com
Sat Sep 17 12:35:56 UTC 2016

I've seen it used on navigable canals to indicate traffic direction.
If there is a route relation I think it should be indicate with 
forward/backward roles.
If not then for clarity, maybe something like traffic_flow=backwards?
Adding a route relation would be preferable though.

Dave F.

On 17/09/2016 13:20, Andy Townsend wrote:
> I've certainly used "oneway=yes" on inland waterways to document 
> signed traffic flow control, so a blanket removal would make no sense.
> There may be places where a previous mapper has tried to use it in 
> error to indicate water flow direction, but you'd need to ask whoever 
> the previous mapper was in each case (or use a bit of common sense).
> Cheers,
> Andy
> *From: *LeTopographeFou
> *Sent: *Saturday, 17 September 2016 13:17
> *To: *tagging at openstreetmap.org
> *Reply To: *Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> *Subject: *[Tagging] Use of oneway=yes on waterways
> Hi
> According to the waterway=stream wiki page 
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dstream):
>     /If a flow exists, the direction of the way must be downstream
>     (i.e. the way direction follows the flow)/
> As of today there is a very small percentage of streams (17593 ways 
> according to taginfo, 0.23%) with oneway=yes.
> Is there any undocumented purpose? Is it ok and safe to delete 
> oneway=yes tags for streams?
> The same question can apply to drains, ditches, canals...
> Yours,
> -- 
> LeTopographeFou
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160917/3923a020/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list