On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:48 PM, ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
To suggest that we now have to include every possible tag with an
explicit value on every element is just ridiculous: the logical
consequence of an explicit oneway on all ways.
+1
The rule is and has always been in OSM the
Am 28.08.2014 um 23:02 schrieb Xavier Noria:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
No, it isn't.
The interpretation of the database, and the meaning, restricted to the
fact of the streets oneway-ness is the same, but no value at all does
not say
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
+0.5, as UIs are decoupled from the data in OSM. You may write your own
editor with a completely different UI, even one that doesn't know about
oneway at all, so reasoning on UI preferences may help to get the
Am 29.08.2014 um 09:58 schrieb Xavier Noria:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
+0.5, as UIs are decoupled from the data in OSM. You may write your own
editor with a completely different UI, even one that doesn't know about
oneway at all, so
To suggest that we now have to include every possible tag with an
explicit value on every element is just ridiculous: the logical
consequence of an explicit oneway on all ways.
Where there really is a need to remove ambiguity, surely something like
an area or perhaps relation (less obvious to the
Hi,
The default value for oneway is no for most types of roads. That
is, if the attribute has no value set, no is assumed. Which is the
rationale for that default?
In the European cities and towns I know the majority of streets are
one-way. For example Barcelona, or Madrid, or Paris. In such
Hi Xavier,
no is the default value of the oneway tag as it's the most correct
assumption.
First as in general most roads are not oneway roads (considering any
road inside and outside of cities), and second as the other case around
would be even worse:
If yes, this is a oneway street would be
Xavier Noria writes:
In the European cities and towns I know the majority of streets are
one-way.
In not a single EU city I know of there is something close to a majority
of streets being one-way. Even more. In most of the villages the roads are
not one-way. Based on this it's a good
I wish people in OSM would stop making things up, believing it makes
their point of view stronger.
On 28/08/2014 13:20, Xavier Noria wrote:
In the European cities and towns I know the majority of streets are
one-way.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
I wish people in OSM would stop making things up, believing it makes their
point of view stronger.
What?
I am not assuming one-way would be a better default. Nor I am assuming
anything about the world at large. What are
Xavier Noria wrote, on 2014-08-28 15:45:
2) In cities and towns where two-way streets are exceptional like
Barcelona or Madrid, are people expected to tag them no? The
motivation for this question is that there seems to be the convention
not to tag them, and therefore you cannot tell the
2014-08-28 14:45 GMT+01:00 Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
I wish people in OSM would stop making things up, believing it makes their
point of view stronger.
What?
I am not assuming one-way would be a better default. Nor
On 2014-08-28 15:53, Dan S wrote:
As Peter said, the default for services using OSM is always to assume
a way is _not_ oneway unless tagged otherwise.
Unless it is tagged as junction=roundabout
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote:
2) In cities and towns where two-way streets are exceptional like
Barcelona or Madrid, are people expected to tag them no? The
motivation for this question is that there seems to be the convention
not to tag them, and
For the sake of discussion, I believe the interface for setting this
attribute could be different (I am a software developer).
For example, in graphical interfaces like iD you could have no
preselected as convenience. But if you send no, you are saying no.
Otherwise, you could opt-out and leave
Right now, the oneway checkbox in iD cycles through “Yes” “No” and “Assumed to
be No” (blank).
There are a handful of situations that will switch this checkbox to say “Yes”
“No” and “Assumed to be Yes” (blank).
(for example, a `junction=roundabout` or `highway=motorway` tag)
It sounds to me
I believe that you haven't explicitly said so, but probably essentially
want to be able to find streets that haven't been surveyed and
potentially need a oneway tag and avoid false positives (aka such that
are actually bi-directional).
I don't believe you'll get any further with the oneway tag,
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Bryan Housel br...@7thposition.com wrote:
Right now, the oneway checkbox in iD cycles through “Yes” “No” and “Assumed
to be No” (blank).
There are a handful of situations that will switch this checkbox to say “Yes”
“No” and “Assumed to be Yes” (blank).
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
I believe that you haven't explicitly said so, but probably essentially
want to be able to find streets that haven't been surveyed and
potentially need a oneway tag and avoid false positives (aka such that
are actually
Am 28.08.2014 17:07, schrieb Xavier Noria:
...
That makes me also wonder as a side-effect about the implication of
the current contract and the usage patterns it promotes. Implications
in particular for turn-by-turn indications, but that was secondary, my
main motivation is the one above.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
In any case there are roughly 45 million highway segments on which a
oneway tag could make sense, vs. roughly 6 million oneway=yes and 1.5
million oneway=no. I suspect that it is really -far- too late to change
the semantics
For a street, there is no practical difference nowadays between no
and unset, which is a smell for me. Either way means no.
For the software? No, there isn't a difference.
For the mapper? Yes, there is a difference.
Since nowadays NULL for a street means oneway=no a change in the
semantics
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:52 PM, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com wrote:
For a street, there is no practical difference nowadays between no
and unset, which is a smell for me. Either way means no.
For the software? No, there isn't a difference.
For the mapper? Yes, there is a difference.
On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 13:52 -0300, John Packer wrote:
For a street, there is no practical difference nowadays
between no
and unset, which is a smell for me. Either way means no.
For the software? No, there isn't a difference.
For the mapper? Yes, there is a
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
+1
To use add oneway=no in selected areas to confirm the road has been
surveyed is fine, but not everywhere as that causes tag clutter and
makes it difficult for a mapper to see the important tags.
Which tools does a
Am 28.08.2014 19:10, schrieb Xavier Noria:
...
But for example, every single client software of OSM that is out of
control of OSM is assuming that contract. That's what I believe makes
a reset (no NULLs in the database) plus semantic change for NULLs
would not be possible. No way to
On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 19:16 +0200, Xavier Noria wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
+1
To use add oneway=no in selected areas to confirm the road has been
surveyed is fine, but not everywhere as that causes tag clutter and
makes it
Since I see the characteristics of Barcelona (and other cities/towns I
know) are exceptional for most of you guys, let me share a couple of
maps to explain where I am coming from.
This is a typical sector of Barcelona:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7o32zbneoi8y6q/barcelona_sample.png?dl=0
As
2014-08-28 22:31 GMT+02:00 Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com:
that area in the center with many blue lines... almost all of them are
wrong. You cannot rely on that default in Barcelona at all.
And in this really rare situation it is reasonable to use oneway=no.
Am 28.08.2014 um 19:10 schrieb Xavier Noria:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:52 PM, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com wrote:
For a street, there is no practical difference nowadays between no
and unset, which is a smell for me. Either way means no.
For the software? No, there isn't a difference.
Am 28.08.2014 um 22:35 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
2014-08-28 22:31 GMT+02:00 Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com:
that area in the center with many blue lines... almost all of them are
wrong. You cannot rely on that default in Barcelona at all.
And in this really rare situation it is reasonable
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
Am 28.08.2014 um 22:35 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
2014-08-28 22:31 GMT+02:00 Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com:
that area in the center with many blue lines... almost all of them are
wrong. You cannot rely on that
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
No, it isn't.
The interpretation of the database, and the meaning, restricted to the
fact of the streets oneway-ness is the same, but no value at all does
not say this is no oneway street, it says nothing more
33 matches
Mail list logo
