[OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

[Lester Caine]

On 03/06/15 11:08, Shaun McDonald wrote:
>> I agree that in every case where oneway=yes is not implied, oneway=no is superfluous (in a network design way), but that does not make oneway=no superfluous.
>> > 
> There are some cases where oneway=no is useful. For example an area where there is lots of one way streets and only a few that are two way, adding the oneway=no confirms that the data is correct rather than the oneway=yes being missing. Similarly where a street was oneway previously and has recently been made two way, this makes it explicit that it is now two way in addition to whatever changeset note there may be.

The one element of this which is not easy to tag currently is where a
section of road is one direction in the morning and another in the
afternoon? That the routing software can use yes and -1 depending on the
time of day is practical and another example of where a simple single
oneway value is limiting. In this case 'reverse' is more accurate, but
as long as values are well documented the exact value is somewhat
irrelevant. The couple of examples I know off are a little more complex
in that the signage is under manual control rather than via a clock :)

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk