[OSM-talk] landing stage - and things that stick out into water

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Collinson" <mike at ayeltd.biz>
To: "OSM" <talk at openstreetmap.org>; <matthew-osm at newtoncomputing.co.uk>; 
"David Groom" <reviews at pacific-rim.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] landing stage - and things that stick out into water


> Just got back from a long coastal road trip where this cropped up so 
> apologies for resurrecting this one.
>
> I drafted a couple of proposals below but have removed them from the 
> Proposed Features index when I noticed that man_made=pier has already been 
> approved.
>
> My question to the proposer (sorry, I can't work out who you are) and 
> anyone interested, is to what extent this new category covers these 
> situations and what to do where it doesn't? :
>
> - projecting structures for landing, mooring, loading vessels big and 
> small.
> - structures built for pleasure purposes such as Blackpool or Santa Monica 
> Pier

I wasn't the proposer, but was one of the people who voted for the feature. 
My understanding was that man_made=pier would refer to both the above 
situations


> - breakwater structure to influence the current or tide or to protect a 
> harbour or shoreline from storms or erosion.

I would have thought man_made = harbour_wall which is already on the 
proposed feature list might have been expanded to cover the above situation
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features#Proposed_Features_-_Man_made

David

>
> My problem is that a pier refers to a specific form of construction using 
> piers which may exclude many examples of the above.  For example 
> breakwaters may be solid filled concrete structures or piled natural 
> boulders.  Or am I just being hopelessly pedantic?
>
> If anyone is further interested, my own proposal would have been to have 
> two separate categories: man_made=jetty and man_made=breakwater:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Jetties_and_piers
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Breakwater
>
> Mike
> Oz
>
>
> At 08:53 PM 3/11/2006, matthew-osm at newtoncomputing.co.uk wrote:
>>[ All the top-posting... it's so confusing :( - message reorganised 
>>below ]
>>
>> >> >> I need a landing stage, ....where boats can land.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Has anyone invented that tag yet, we have loads of them.
>> >> >> highway=landing stage ?
>>
>> >> > Interesting one that. If its a slipway ramp I'd perhaps be in two 
>> >> > minds
>> >> > whether to call it waterway=slipway or highway=slipway but
>> would probably
>> >> > pick the latter as its not actually part of the waterway itself. For 
>> >> > a
>> >> > landing stage its very much in the water (assuming we are talking 
>> >> > about
>> >> > the same thing) but it too has a highway rather than waterway
>> function so
>> >> > highway=landing_stage would make logical sense to me.
>>
>> >> not a slipway, I mean a pier (on piers) made from wood, sometimes 
>> >> concrete
>> >> for boats on lakes, rivers. Small boats, like barges, not cargo ships.
>>
>> > There is a proposal for manmade=pier, would that do
>>
>>I think that using highway= is wrong. My knowledge of piers and landing 
>>stages
>>is rather non-existant, but I have seen some that you can walk down, some 
>>that
>>could be driven down, and some that have railways only.
>>
>>So this could eventually require something like
>>
>>   highway=pier_footway
>>   highway=pier_service
>>   railway=pier_rail
>>   highway=landing_stage_footway
>>
>>Better to have
>>
>>   <something>=pier
>>   highway=service
>>
>>   <something>=pier
>>   railway=rail
>>   highway=footway
>>
>>   <something>=landing_stage
>>   highway=footway
>>
>>...the question is what do you use as "something"? ;-)
>>
>>I agree, "manmade" sounds a bit wierd, although it is true. Waterway is 
>>out -
>>it's used for things that _are_ water, so the double use for things that 
>>go
>>on/in water is confusing. Something like "wateraccess" maybe? This is 
>>probably a
>>dreadful suggestion, as I'm usually useless at thinking this stuff up.
>>
>>This would be linear
>>
>>   something like a small landing stage:
>>     wateraccess=landing_stage
>>     highway=footway
>>
>>an area
>>
>>   maybe a larger pier:
>>     wateraccess=pier
>>     wateraccess_construction=concrete
>>
>>   (this would contain things like highway=footway or railway=rail as 
>> separate
>>   ways)
>>
>>or a node
>>
>>   on a riverbank:
>>     wateraccess=boat_hut
>>
>>There is already leisure=slipway. This seems like a bad use of "leisure" 
>>to me;
>>I think (linear) wateraccess=slipway is probably better.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>--
>>Matthew
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>talk mailing list
>>talk at openstreetmap.org
>>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>