[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