Al Girling wrote: >Sent: 08 March 2010 4:49 PM >To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] rendering locks > >On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:32:59PM GMT, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> Steve Chilton wrote: >> > two nodes with waterway=lock_gate at either end of a way tagged >> > waterway=canal;lock=yes >> > and >> > single node with waterway=lock OR lock=yes (with lock-gates not >> > mapped) >> >> These are definitely sensible. (I have a preference for the latter on >> the UK canal system.) > >I use the first of these two options and include name and ref too. It >could easily be argued that length and width tags should be added as few >locks conform to a standard size and you clearly need to know if you'd >like to take your sixty foot narrowboat on a waterway that has locks >only forty foot long. > >> I think in time we may need to map some locks as areas, though in >> Britain there aren't that many big enough to justify the treatment. >> Eastham Lock certainly is! > >Agreed, while not perhaps not as common in the UK, the locks on, say, >the Rhine, Danube or Panama Canal are the size of several football >pitches, so an area is far more logical. >
Arguably when they are this size you can draw in the individual features. The bathtub as an area, lock gates as ways (your choice whether the gates are open or closed ;-) ) and all the little tunnels that take water around the gates. Cheers Andy _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
