[Talk-GB] Waterways Map (was invisible)

Jerry Clough - OSM sk53_osm at yahoo.co.uk
Thu Jan 20 11:10:24 GMT 2011

There are also long sections of the Grantham Canal which are Nature  Reserves: 
there's a fantastic stretch in the Vale of Belvoir with masses  of interesting 
aquatic vegetation and in late May, early June a  remarkable range of 
dragonflies and damselflies. There are some  conflicts in tagging between this 
sort of disused canal and its current  use: although I haven't investigated them 
recently. I think the main one  was that a disused canal full of water is very 
different from one which  is dry: but from a naturalists perspective the fact 
that the water body  is a canal rather than catch-all natural=water is 

There  are several other stretches of disused/abandoned canal also around  
Nottingham, these include: the disused Derby Canal (very apparent at its  W end 
near Swarkestone,  less apparent at its E end near Sandiacre), stretches of the 
Nottingham  Canal (some of which is occupied by the culverted River Leen, and 
lock 6  (I think) is used by NCN 6 to pass under the ring-road), the Nutbush  
Canal, the E end of the Cromford Canal, and some very early canals  serving 
collieries which have completely disappeared. I don't propose to  map any of 
these in the near future, but there is plenty of remaining  infrastructure for 
the observant to find. 

Certainly the Grantham  Canal is a good place to clarify how to tag canals in 
various states of  disuse: potentially to satisfy differing wants of, inter 
alia,  the waterway map completists, waterway restoration types, cyclists,  
walkers, fishermen (not many in OSM I think) and naturalists.

I'd  also second TomH: there are lots of things showing as navigable which  look 
odd: Cromford Canal from Cromford to Ambergate (now a nature  reserve, and  
possibly an SSSI), the Loddon S of Twyford. The Trent appears to be  unnavigable 
between Nottingham and Newark. There are several fast  flowing rivers in 
Scotland deemed navigable, like the one to the W of  Loch Tulla. I presume that 
we have a consensus that boat=yes does not  included canoes, paper boats, pooh 
sticks, or even a small rowing boat  or dingy?

Anyway thanks to Chris for persistence in asking the  question, and Graham for 
the visualisation: no doubt a few things will  be fixed soon.


From: Kev js1982 <osm at kevswindells.eu>
To: Graham Jones <grahamjones139 at gmail.com>
Cc: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wed, 19 January, 2011 22:27:59
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Waterways Map (was invisible)

The Grantham canal round here varies in quality from
Being in a pipe under the road for a big stretch
Looking like a normal canal but with all the locks missing/ damaged
Drained of water and full of weeds
Looking like a normal canal but full of algee and other stagnet strenches
Oh, and most paths/roads cross on the level with nothing more than a pipe 
The tow paths are generally navigatable by foot, and from plunger ( I think) to 
the trent by bike in all weathers ( if you ignore the a46 Fosseway crossing 
which is closed to allow the construction of a dual carridgeway)
On 19 Jan 2011 21:29, "Graham Jones" <grahamjones139 at gmail.com> wrote:
>Thank you all for your comments.
>Dealing with 'disused' was nice and easy - I have deleted disused locks 
>altogether and changed disused canals to a fainter, dotted line (see just north 
>of Carnforth near Lancaster).  I am not sure I have ever seen a 'disused' canal 
>- does this mean a ditch, or just an overgrown, impassable canal?   
>I have also prevented locks being shown until you zoom in to zoom level 10. 
> Updated version now rendering at http://maps.webhop.net/canals, using the 
>mapnik style http://maps.webhop.net/canals/canal2.xml..
>Adding navigable rivers is a good idea, but will take more doing because my 
>database does not include the 'boat=' tag - I will have to re-import the whole 
>uk, which takes a few hours.......
>Are there any other waterway specific tags that should be included?
>What points of interest should a waterways map highlight - I only have locks at 
>the moment, because I remember these being the interesting part of canal 
>boating, but I can add other things - especially if anyone would like to draw an 
>icon for it - otherwise we will end up with another one of my dodgy drawings!
>On 19 January 2011 19:24, Chris Moss <moschris at googlemail.com> wrote:
>Thanks Graham and Malcolm,
>>Certainly I can see for the first time where the gaps are in the waterway 
>>coverage and it encourages me to explore mapnik and see how everything works.
>>Talk-GB mailing list
>>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>Graham Jones
>Hartlepool, UK.
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110120/1e7e9cb3/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list