On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: > > The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum...... put yourself in the position where > you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one > vehicle but has passing bays along it's length. It is not wide enough to be > a conventional twoway road so can it be tagged twoway? That would give the > impression that cars can progress along it in opposite directions at the > same time....that would be incorrect. But neither direction has the right of > way and it is up to driver discretion and politeness as to who will reverse > back to the passing bay. So oneway=no but twoway is not necessary yes. > > i've used > > lanes=1 > > and omitted oneway in these cases > > richard >
Surely here the point is that the "oneway" tag describes the *legalities* of use, rather than the physical setup. "oneway=yes" means "you are only permitted to travel in one direction along this way", not "this way has one lane". Equally, "oneway=no" doesn't imply anything about the number of lanes, and would be entirely correct (if generally redundant) tagging on a single-lane road. This is why I think "oneway" is a suitable tag but "twoway" would not be -- the "two" might imply a set number of lanes which might not match what's on the ground. Hence the "lanes" tag. Thanks, David (user Pgd81) _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
