[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

[Janko Mihelić]

I think the "forward" and "backward" don't belong in a role of a relation.
Oneway=yes on a way should be enough. In the Wiki discussion it is said
that if there is one little "oneway" way in a big branch, then all the ways
in a branch should be checked to see if the whole branch is oneway. But
that means we are doing the work of a router directly in the tags.

We should just mark "oneway" ways as such, and leave the rest to the
routers.

Also, "main" and "alternative" are orthogonal to "forward" and "backward".
We should then have "main:forward", "alternative:backward", and so on. That
doesn't make sense, and is not what "role" is traditionally used for.
Public transport routes used to use them, but not in the new scheme.

Janko
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191206/32f14edb/attachment.html>