[OSM-talk] Mapping canals

[Stephen Gower]

  Hi Gerv - I've snipped lots below - if I haven't commented on any
  part, I pretty much agree.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 06:36:48PM +0000, Gervase Markham wrote:
> 
> Narrow sections are denoted by maxwidth. One narrowboat (just over 7 
> feet) is given as 2.5m. Two boats is 5m. It's not necessary to mark a 
> two-boat width restriction for bridge holes, which are implied narrow.

  I don't mind there being an assumption that unspecified units are
  metres, but the UK canals are done in feet, and if I'm going to put
  any dimensions in, it'll be in feet, so I'd need a way to specify
  that's what I'd done.
 
> "boat=private" is used for private parts of the canal.

  I see no reason not to use access=private, myself, since the
  towpath can have a seperate access tag.
 
> The "lock=yes" way(s) takes various lock-related information, including:
> 
> - the lock name, if it has one, with "name=<foo>".

  since this way is also part of the waterway, name= is already in
  use for the name of the waterway - we need something else for the
  lock names.

> A flight of locks with a unifying name (e.g. "Hatton Locks") is denoted 
> with a node placed in an appropriately central position with new tag 
> value "place=lock_flight" and "name=<name>".

  Better to group them with a relation, I'd have thought.
 
> Moorings
> --------
> 
> Mooring info should be attached to the relevant stretch of towpath [...]

  On UK canals, mooring is generally allowed everywhere, except where
  explicity signed otherwise - do we need a tag for
  mooring-not-allowed?
 
  Thanks for thinking this through!
  
  s