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
With all that discussion about implied onewayness could anyone please
elaborate the advantage of tagging just
highway=motorway
opposed to
highway=motorway
oneway=yes
besides it being one tag shorter? I think the second alternative is
much more precise.
Claudius Henrichs schrieb:
With all that discussion about implied onewayness could anyone please
elaborate the advantage of tagging just
highway=motorway
opposed to
highway=motorway
oneway=yes
besides it being one tag shorter? I think the second alternative is
much more precise.
Am Mittwoch 08 Oktober 2008 17:59:07 schrieb Doru Julian Bugariu:
Claudius Henrichs schrieb:
With all that discussion about implied onewayness could anyone please
elaborate the advantage of tagging just
highway=motorway
opposed to
highway=motorway
oneway=yes
besides it being
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Doru Julian Bugariu [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
If a way is oneway then it should have a oneway=true tag, regardless
if it is a motorway or a residential way.
+1 here, too.
There should be zero implied tags. Ever.
___
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Alex Mauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Dees wrote:
+1 here, too.
There should be zero implied tags. Ever.
Great, you want to go ahead and tag bridge=no,motorcar=yes,hgv=yes, etc.
on every single way where that applies? thanks in advance.
No, I'm
Ian Dees wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Alex Mauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Dees wrote:
+1 here, too.
There should be zero implied tags. Ever.
Great, you want to go ahead and tag bridge=no,motorcar=yes,hgv=yes, etc.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Alex Mauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO, highway=motorway(_link) is to oneway=yes as highway=* is to
bridge=no. (and motorcar=yes, hgv=yes, etc.) in that there is no need
to add the latter when the former is there.
Ok, I concede my argument. That makes
Ian Dees wrote:
there's got to be
somewhere on this great planet of ours where a highway=motorway_link or
highway=motorway is not oneway=yes, but it is safe to assume that when
highway=*, motorcar=yes is always safe to assume.
Oh, there definitely are places where highway=motorway is not
Alex Mauer:
highway=* isn't always motorcar=yes, either. There's a table at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions
which describes the restrictions. (Note: I did not create it.)
The page you linked applies only to one appliance of OSM data which is
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
There are three options:
1. make no assumptions: This means every single motorway_link
needs to have a oneway=yes or oneway=no (or oneway=-1). A pain
for taggers, and doesn't help makers of routing applications who
still
On 10/3/2008 6:27 AM, Ben Laenen wrote:
Then read the example on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=motorway_link once.
It says: The green way in this example can then be a simple junction
withhighway=motorway_link without the oneway tag, as it is supposed to
be used in both
I've been getting reports about routing problems where bi-directional
traffic is allowed on motorway_link roads. The map features page does
not state clearly which oneway value is implied however: The green box
states oneway=yes is implied, the descriptive text implies oneway=no.
It's time to
I assume that everything is two way (including motorway,
motorway_link, trunk and trunk_link) unless there is a oneway=yes/true/
1 tag.
Shaun
On 2 Oct 2008, at 09:47, Lambertus wrote:
I've been getting reports about routing problems where bi-directional
traffic is allowed on motorway_link
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Shaun McDonald
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
I assume that
Nic Roets wrote:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
I assume that everything is two way (including motorway,
Marc Schütz wrote:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
A motorway yes, but not a motorway_link.
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
Quite the opposite:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
A motorway yes, but not a motorway_link.
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
Quite the opposite: most motorway_links
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Nic Roets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
I agree on the
Elena of Valhalla wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Nic Roets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
A motorway yes, but not a motorway_link.
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very
rare.
Quite the opposite: most
Lester Caine wrote:
Sent: 02 October 2008 11:22 AM
To: OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] - RFC - Motorway_link implies oneway=??
Marc Schütz wrote:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
A motorway yes, but not a motorway_link.
My opinion is that motorway
Nic Roets wrote:
My opinion is that motorway and motorway_link must both default to
oneway=true, as the bi-directional varieties are non-existent / very rare.
I agree. Even if they're not very rare, they're certainly less common
than the one-way variety.
-Alex Mauer hawke
2008/10/2 Nic Roets [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Isn't a motorway by definition divided and therefore oneway ?
Usually, but not always. Exceptions have existed either at the
beginning of a motorway, where the last escape for non-motorway
traffic occurs, say 100m before the directions separate. France used
Matthias Julius wrote:
I don't. I think it follows the principle of least surprise better
if implied values don't change too much.
Great, then we should leave this as-is (implied oneway=yes for
motorway_link)
If a highway is not oneway
by definition oneway=yes should not be implied.
You
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
Matthias Julius wrote:
I don't. I think it follows the principle of least surprise
better if implied values don't change too much.
Great, then we should leave this as-is (implied oneway=yes for
motorway_link)
That would work if it weren't
Ben Laenen wrote:
There are three options:
1. make no assumptions: This means every single motorway_link needs
to have a oneway=yes or oneway=no (or oneway=-1). A pain for
taggers, and doesn't help makers of routing applications who still
need to handle the case where there is no oneway tag.
27 matches
Mail list logo
