> I notice a quicky increasing number of oneway=no tags on roads, probably > due > to editors offering some flashy list box for the oneway key. I wonder > what's > next. bridge=no, tunnel=no...? > > I find these information-less tags annoying, because you have to browse a > long list of bogus tags on each object to finally spot the one or two tags > that actually matter.
It depends. Sometimes it is useful to add this tag. I typically add it to bidirectional cycle paths along roads as you would normally expect such cycleways to be oneway. Adding a oneway=no indicates that it has been surveyed and found to be bidirectional and will further prevent eager mappers adding the "missing" oneway=yes tag to this cycleway. But I agree that it is silly to add it to all highways in general. I occasionally see highways having long lists of obvious *=yes access tags (and some silly *=no as well such as boat=no on a highway=trunk!). > > I think that those editors should only make <undefined>, "yes" and "-1" > selectable, or omit the "no" values on upload at last, except for > motorways, > motorway_links and roundabouts. A roundabout with oneway=no is not a roundabout, just a circular road. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
