[Talk-GB] Oneway assumes cars?

[Dave Stubbs]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:47 PM, Ed Loach <ed at loach.me.uk> wrote:
> Shaun replied:
>
>> As far as I understand oneway=yes applies to all vehicles on
>> wheels.
>> Therefore you have to do an exception for the cyclists and the
>> buses.
>> cycleway=opposite_lane; psv=opposite_lane should do the trick.
>> It
>> appears that in this case it hasn't been fully mapped.
>>
>> If it is a highway=footway, then the oneway will apply to the
>> pedestrians. The same goes for highway=cycleway.
>
> Looking at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Map_Features
> isn't it just cycleway=opposite, rather than cycleway=opposite_lane?
>
> I'm not entirely sure of the difference.


The difference is whether there is a lane for bikes in the opposite
direction to the oneway (ie: road markings with a line down the road
to separate traffic), or whether you can just cycle the wrong way down
the road avoiding any on coming cars.

The vast majority of the time in the UK it'll be an opposite lane or
an opposite track (track is when it's separated from the road). Just
ignoring oneways is quite common elsewhere in Europe.

>
> The equivalent suggested for psv makes sense, but doesn't feature in
> Map_Features at all (and looking neither does the equivalent tags
> for taxis, for roads where cars can only go one way, but buses,
> taxis and bicycles (and maybe motorbikes) can go both ways). I guess
> that just means your road will get highlighted in the MapLint stuff
> with the "not-in-Map-Features" highlighting.
>

in my experience most well mapped areas do as people get inventive...
personally I'd remove that test as its next to useless

Dave