[Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

[Volker Schmidt]

Sorry, I am getting confused here (I am listening in as I frequently map
bìcycle routes).
The "oneway" tag  would only make sense on a loop-shaped route. And only if
there are only ways and no nodes like signposts ecc, and if there are no
branches, and only if all members of the route were oneway ways. Very
special case.
I normally handle oneway ways in a route which is bidirectional using the
forward/backward roles on the ways concerned (as is also normal practice on
bus routes around my part of the world). This is frequent for bicycles, but
I would expect it to be very rare for pedestrians.
If you want to indicate the preferred direction of a walking route that is
basically loop-shaped, a concept that is different from the legally binding
oneway, then some kind of clockwise / anticlockwise tagging should be used.
If a hiking route contains parts which are oneway for pedestians then this
should be tagged an all ways to which this applies with "oneway:foot=yes".



On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 23:19, Jmapb <jmapb at gmx.com> wrote:

> On 3/12/2019 6:09 PM, Warin wrote:
>
> > On 13/03/19 08:59, Jmapb wrote:
> >>
> >> Is there any point in considering a tag for oneways that are not
> >> enforced but generally done nonetheless? oneway=traditional,
> >> oneway=suggested, something like that? (Again, I know I've seen
> >> these, but I can't think of an example offhand.)
> >>
> >
> > oneway=recommended? matches present use of  4wd=recommended
>
> I like it. Now I just have to remember where to put it.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190313/36a842e1/attachment.html>