[Tagging] How to tag oneway restriction applying to pedestrians?

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Jan 15 08:51:42 UTC 2020

Am Di., 14. Jan. 2020 um 15:55 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com>:

> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 14:35, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Mine goes like this: leading the list is the completely meaningless (and I
>> guess most will agree with this judgement) oneway:foot=no
> It's not meaningless at all.  It says that although the road is oneway to
> vehicular
> traffic, pedestrians may walk in either direction.

this is already the commonly agreed, documented since 15 years, meaning of
oneway=yes. Nothing added.

>   This is not always the case:
> single-lane roads without a pavement may require that pedestrians only
> walk in
> the opposite direction to oneway vehicular traffic on safety grounds.

Like in "they may not legally walk in the oneway direction"? Which
jurisdiction is this?
In the jurisdictions I am aware of, in absence of a pavement you have to
walk on the road / carriageway. You may not do so only if there are signs
that prohibit pedestrian usage.

>   The use
> of oneway:foot=no makes clear that no such restriction applies to
> pedestrians
> and that the onewayness of the road applies only to vehicular traffic.
> We use similar schemes for access tags.  Why are you having difficulty
> with this?

I do not have difficulty with it, it is just meaningless. A similar case
for access tags would be motor_vehicle=no and then add a motorcar=no. It
doesn't add anything.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200115/93af5fc7/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list