On 1/13/2020 9:43 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:21 AM Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote:
Not very intuitive but, perhaps in rare cases, necessary. What if the road is
one-way to both vehicles and pedestrians but vehicles go from A to B whilst
pedestrians go from B to A?
You beat me to it!
I know I've seen a footway on the verge of the roadway signed, 'WALK
ON LEFT, FACING TRAFFIC.' If the road was a dual-carriageway (it might
have been, I don't recall now), then we'd have had exactly that
situation. "Just reverse the way" isn't a solution when it's forward
for one mode and backward for another.
The "traditional" (by my observation) way to tag this would be:
highway=residential
oneway=yes
oneway:foot=-1
Using the forward/backward tags, it would be:
highway=residential
oneway=yes
foot:forward=no
foot:backward=yes
IMO they're both ugly. Don't love -1, and don't love introducing a new
backward/forward scheme with basically the same meaning and possibly
ambiguous interactions with the older oneway scheme.
...Scouting around on Overpass, I found one footway that was tagged
something like this:
highway=footway
foot:forward=designated
foot:backward=yes
I think it was something like a nature trail or historic walk where
there's a designed direction of foot traffic but it's not an actual
restriction. That's the best justification I've seen for the
foot:forward/foot:backward tags, though of course one could conjur up
some value like oneway=intended that could mean the same thing.
J
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
