I have actually come across 1 instance where a pedestrian should not go in the opposite direction, and markings were actually different for the directions. Most hikers would simply use the opposite route section for both directions. That is to say it's a very rare exception. Completely different from cycling routes, which tend to have many sections where the route directions use different sets of ways.
I think a simple oneway=yes on a hiking route relation could say it's signposted for one direction. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 7 dec. 2019 om 01:12 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > het volgende geschreven: > > > > sent from a phone > >> On 6. Dec 2019, at 19:29, Janko Mihelić <jan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I think the "forward" and "backward" don't belong in a role of a relation. >> Oneway=yes on a way should be enough > > > oneway is generally not considered to apply to pedestrians. > I agree with what Kevin has written, there should be a way to distinguish > several cases of forward / backward, those where you can walk in both > directions but only one is signposted, and those where you actually can’t use > it bidirectionally (e.g. it is too narrow and too much traffic) > > Cheers Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
