[Talk-us] Relation roles: Clockwise and Counterclockwise route directions? (e.g. Pittsburgh's Belts)

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I know that north/south/east/west directions are preferred for relation
> roles of one-way route segments (e.g. one-way pairs or divided highways),
> but what about clockwise and counterclockwise? Often beltways, like D.C.'s
> Capital Beltway, are signed such that they abruptly go from north/south to
> east/west, but then you have routes like Pittsburgh's Belt System, where
> the Belts aren't signed with directions at all. These seem to be given "CW"
> (clockwise) and "CCW" (counterclockwise) roles. Is this correct, or does
> "forward" or some other role need to be used?
>

Always use forward/backward as the role if the member is a way.  Always use
a cardinal or clockwise/anticlockwise for the role on a route master when
the members are relations.  Trying to use anything other than
forward/backward on ways makes routes an extraordinary pain in the butt if
not unmaintainable.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20170104/4df050a7/attachment.html>