On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer >> Generally, I don't think it's acceptable to change the definitions of >> tags in this way. > > +1 +1 (although my recent edits against noexit=no)
>> >> I also wonder how we should deal with this specific situation. Can we >> still assume any default oneway information for *_link values (whether >> it's yes or no) or is oneway=yes/no a required second tag for *_links? >> > > no, IMHO we shouldn't generally "imply" but tag explicitly, otherwise > consistency is at risk. > no, if we don't have defaults, we will have to populate 20, 30 or 50 attributs on each highway in the future. Don't ask too much from volunteers. > yes, oneway=no is the default for all streets unless explicitly stated. Even > for motorways I wouldn't assume oneway=yes (it could still be that a > motorway is not yet mapped as dual carriage-way). > I still see one exception where oneway=yes is surely implied : in junction=roundabout. Pieren _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
