[Tagging] s oneway=yes applying only to vehicles? ) Or is it applying to traffic on main part of way?

[Volker Schmidt]

Some comments for the situation in Italy.

On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 at 13:40, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> 1) oneway=yes is typically used on roads
>
Not only on roads, but also on cycle-only-ways, on segregated
foot-cycle-ways and on non-segregated foot-cycle-ways, where it only
applies to the vehicles (bicycles and electric scooters very rarely on
foot-only-ways.
oneway is not used on escalators and walkways. Use "conveying=" on these

> 2) when oneway=yes is used on roads it applies to vehicles and does not
> apply
> to pedestrians on sidewalks
>
Yes

> 3) when oneway=yes is used on roads it applies also to cyclists on
> carriageway
> (unless overridden by oneway:bicycle=no)
>
Yes

>
> Questions:
> (1) is oneway=yes on road applying to cyclists travelling on
> sidewalks/cycleway=track?
>
If the the sidewalk/cycleway/cycle-lane is tagged as a separate way, no
If the the cycleway is tagged as cycleway=track on the road highway, no
If the cycleway is tagged as cycleway=lane yes, unless there is a
oneway:bicycle=no
The problem with the cycleway=lane|track is also that it does not say how
many cycleways there are and on which side of the road.


> (2)
> Is oneway=yes applying to pedestrians when used on ways where no vehicle
> traffic
> is allowed?
> For example is oneway=yes highway=footway oneway for pedestrians?
>
Yes, unless there are same vehicle exceptions tagged on the way. In that
case we would need to add oneway:foot=yes

>
> Is it correct to map oneway hiking trail as
> highway=path + oneway=yes + foot=yes + bicycle=no + ski=no + snowmobile=no
> ?
>
If the he trail (typically a relation) has a preferred direction, or is
only signposted in one direction, the oneway tag is not suitable, as it is
an access tag that refers to the legal access. Unless the rare cases,
obviously, where legally there is a oneway-restriction also for pedestrians.

(3) is oneway=yes used in meaning "applies to all vehicles" So would apply
> on main road part, on sidewalks, on attached cycleways if mapped as
> property of road.
>
(as said above only oif there is no bicycle:oneway=no)


> And highway=tertiary cycleway:both=track oneway=yes would mean
> that attached cycleways are oneway in direction of way.
>
No. In that case you have to indicate for each track the oneway direction:
e.g.
cycleway:left:oneway=yes
cycleway:right:oneway=-1
or
cycleway:both:oneway=no

>
> Or is it better defined as "applies to main part of the way"
> So would apply to carriageway if used on road
> And highway=tertiary cycleway:both=track oneway=yes would mean
> that attached cycleways can be used in both directions.
>
(see above)

> So would apply to pedestrians if used on highway=footway
>
I would assume that the default for footways is oneway:foot=no

This concerns
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:foot
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway
> where there is a quite prolonged disagreement how this should be tagged
> and how it is being tagged.
>
> Note that I am not asking how tagging scheme would be designed in the idea
> world
> and I am not asking is OSM Wiki currently correct - I am asking about
> actual use.
>
I should add that I have described my way of tagging. I think it's shared
by other mappers in Italy.

Slightly off topic:
I do not know the situation for horse riders, but would assume that ridden
horses should obey the oneway rules for vehicles (this is positively the
case in Germany, but i'm not sure for Italy


> Based on what I know highway=footway oneway=yes means that such way
> is oneway for pedestrians and current OSM Wiki description is incorrectly
> making claims about oneway:foot.
>


>
> And such redefinition would not even be helpful.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220320/e5391b42/attachment.htm>