[OSM-talk] [Tagging] - RFC - Motorway_link implies oneway=??

Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk
Thu Oct 9 07:17:40 BST 2008


Alex Mauer wrote:
> versus implying it to be oneway=no, there's *probably* a reduction in 
> the amount of tagging needed, because there are probably more ways with 
> motorway_link that are oneway=yes than oneway=no.  In addition, for a 
> routing application it increases safety.  It's a lot worse to route 
> someone the wrong way up a one-way motorway_link because it was assumed 
> to be two-way than it is to send someone on a longer/slower route 
> because it was assumed to be one-way.

I think that is the best argument FOR a specific default in this case?
Even where there are two way sections linking to a motorway I think it would 
be highly unlikely that there will not be at least a short section of one way 
working for the actual slip section on and off ( OK SOMEWHERE will break that 
rule but I would not like to live near that accident spot :( ) so the two way 
bit will probably be an extra segment - tagged motorway_link!

Of cause directions of these segments is as important as the oneway data, but 
only a routing program may spot an error?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php




More information about the talk mailing list