I wiould mark the route oneway=yes to indicate oneway signposting, then oneway:foot=yes (or whatever is in use to indicate an access restriction on a way) on the ways where it is actually forbidden. I would not take oneway=yes on a route relation to indicate legal restriction on its members.
Vr gr Peter Elderson Op za 7 dec. 2019 om 13:22 schreef Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > There are some hiking routes > signposted with allowing travel in one > direction and forbidding in the opposite. > > > 7 Dec 2019, 13:04 by pelder...@gmail.com: > > Cannot be legal for a pedestrian route, I think. So practical. > > Mvg Peter Elderson > > Op 7 dec. 2019 om 10:53 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > het volgende geschreven: > > > > sent from a phone > > On 7. Dec 2019, at 04:36, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If oneway=yes is placed on a route relation then any excursions and > appropriate approaches will have to be separate relations. > > > > is it a legal restriction or a practical one if placed on a route relation? > > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging