Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
On 17/05/2012 19:24, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Basically I'm tagging general characteristics of waterways. It seems the categories will be: *maintained for deep draft ocean vessels *maintained for shallow draft barges and pleasure boats *not maintained, possibly open to pleasure boats I don't see any such values in the Seamark Tag Values table. The closest is depth_max (shouldn't this be maxdepth, to match such tags as maxheight?), but there don't seem to be legal depth restrictions on most waterways here. The seamark tags are aligned on the IHO-S57 Object Attribute catalogue and are aimed at the generation of navigation charts, so are unlikely to provide for your needs. I have not come across tags more detailed than boat=yes for general waterway data. Even that tag is ill-defined - nobody is sure whether it is an indication of permission or of navigability. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
On 17/05/2012 03:44, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/16/2012 10:42 PM, Dale Puch wrote: You might check with the OpenSeaMap guys Surely at one of them is paying attention to tagging@? Nathan, Yes, we are paying attention! What is it that you wish to map? If it is for inclusion in the OpenSeaMap map, then the tagging needs to be in accordance with: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap/Seamark_Tag_Values If it is information of a more general nature, then use whatever OSM conventions are commonly used in USA. I am working on an S57-to-OSM convertor that would enable the public domain charts to be converted to OSM files, readable by JOSM. Unlike other tools out there, it knows all about inland waterway features as per the iENC specifications currently being developed (http://ienc.openecdis.org/) I have been testing it on both the European inland charts (RIS, WSV, etc) as well the NOAA charts. It is nearly ready for public release. Regards, Malcolm ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
Nathan Edgars II wrote: I'm trying to do something like the European tagging: http://www.itoworld.com/map/24 But there they have some sort of international treaty that defines configurations. (puts day-job hat on) For users of a waterway, the European (CEMT) waterway classes describe, rather than define, the size of the limiting structures. They're information, rather than regulation. In other words, although a class Va waterway has a stated length of 110 metres, that doesn't mean that a river policeman will come and flag you down for taking a 115m boat along the river. It's very possible that the locks are (say) 120m long, and if you can get your boat through them, you're absolutely entitled to do so. This is particularly important at the smaller end of things where locks and bridges may be a zillion and one different sizes. (Here in Britain people routinely build boats to 60ft because there are certain locks that are 58ft 6in long... and if you put the boat in the lock diagonally, you can squeeze that little bit of extra accommodation. There are other locks that have subsided to become 1in too narrow for certain historic craft that would once have used the locks. And so on.) So the ideal is to tag each structure with its limiting dimensions, using the familiar maxwidth=/maxheight=/etc. tags. This is never going to be completely achieved, of course, because draught varies for each bit of the riverbed. ;) The next best thing is to tag the 'gauge' of a waterway - in other words, the largest dimensions that will fit through all the structures on that waterway. In Europe, tagging a waterway with the CEMT class would be a quick-and-dirty-though-not-particularly-accurate way of stating the gauge. (That said, the CEMT class would fit very well in the designation= tag.) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/U-S-inland-waterways-tp5709017p5709046.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil//index.htm looks to be one of the places you should look. I found it thru http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Navigation.aspx in case there is more information there. On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:51 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote: Nathan Edgars II wrote: I'm trying to do something like the European tagging: http://www.itoworld.com/map/24 But there they have some sort of international treaty that defines configurations. (puts day-job hat on) For users of a waterway, the European (CEMT) waterway classes describe, rather than define, the size of the limiting structures. They're information, rather than regulation. In other words, although a class Va waterway has a stated length of 110 metres, that doesn't mean that a river policeman will come and flag you down for taking a 115m boat along the river. It's very possible that the locks are (say) 120m long, and if you can get your boat through them, you're absolutely entitled to do so. This is particularly important at the smaller end of things where locks and bridges may be a zillion and one different sizes. (Here in Britain people routinely build boats to 60ft because there are certain locks that are 58ft 6in long... and if you put the boat in the lock diagonally, you can squeeze that little bit of extra accommodation. There are other locks that have subsided to become 1in too narrow for certain historic craft that would once have used the locks. And so on.) So the ideal is to tag each structure with its limiting dimensions, using the familiar maxwidth=/maxheight=/etc. tags. This is never going to be completely achieved, of course, because draught varies for each bit of the riverbed. ;) The next best thing is to tag the 'gauge' of a waterway - in other words, the largest dimensions that will fit through all the structures on that waterway. In Europe, tagging a waterway with the CEMT class would be a quick-and-dirty-though-not-particularly-accurate way of stating the gauge. (That said, the CEMT class would fit very well in the designation= tag.) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/U-S-inland-waterways-tp5709017p5709046.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Dale Puch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
I found this at http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil/data/dictionary/ddnwn.htm Data is here http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil//db/waternet/data/ but not in shp format so someone would need to do some format translation. There are lots of other sets of data and perhaps one of those has something even more along the lines you want. All the USACE data and NOAA data should be public domain the same as tiger, but some investigation should be done before using any specif source. The metadata for this list use and access restrictions as none. Attribute: Attribute_Label: GEO Attribute_Definition: Geographic Class Attribute_Definition_Source: USACE Attribute_Domain_Values: Attribute: character Enumerated_Domain: Enumerated_Domain_Value: G = Great Lakes O = Ocean / Offshore I = Inland Attribute_Label: FUNC Attribute_Definition: Functional Class Attribute_Definition_Source: USACE Attribute_Domain_Values: Attribute: character Enumerated_Domain: Enumerated_Domain_Value: Nno traffic, non-navigable Sshallow draft (i.e., no deep draft ocean vessels) Ddeep draft Bboth Uspecial vessels only (fishing, pleasure craft, etc; normally no freight traffic) Attribute_Label: WTYPE Attribute_Definition: Waterway Type Attribute_Definition_Source: USACE Attribute_Domain_Values: integer Enumerated_Domain: Enumerated_Domain_Value: 1 - Harbor (including harbor channels), Bay 2 - Intracoastal Waterway 3 - Sealane 4 - Sealane with separation zone 5 - Open water 6 - River, creek, thoroughfare, lake 7 - Estuary 8 - Channel (not including harbor channels) 9 - Canal 10 - Great Lakes direct link (major ports) 11 - Great Lakes indirect link 12 - Corps of Engineers Lock On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote: On 5/16/2012 1:06 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: I guess that depends on what you're trying to do... If you are trying to tag the largest possible vessel that can navigate a waterway (under normal conditions at least) you could probably come up with a reasonable set of tags. Inland waterways are highly dynamic though... The Army Corps has well-defined channels that they regularly dredge to a specified depth and width. Can this be matched to some sort of barge classification? __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Dale Puch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
You might check with the OpenSeaMap guys On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote: On 5/16/2012 6:48 PM, Dale Puch wrote: I found this at http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.** mil/data/dictionary/ddnwn.htmhttp://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil/data/dictionary/ddnwn.htm Data is here http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.**mil//db/waternet/data/http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil//db/waternet/data/but not in shp format so someone would need to do some format translation. There are lots of other sets of data and perhaps one of those has something even more along the lines you want. Thanks for the link. I found it in shapefile format: http://www.bts.gov/** publications/national_**transportation_atlas_database/**2011/http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_atlas_database/2011/ So far the depths seem to jibe with other sources, and the functional class looks like a good way to classify waterways, absent more specific local regulations. Any objections to continuing to use ship=yes for navigable waterways, and a new deep_draft=* tag for ocean vessels? -- Dale Puch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: Is anyone familiar with the regulations governing the U.S. inland waterways (such as the Mississippi River and the Intracoastal Waterway)? It's been a long time since I've done any boating, so I'm not an expert or anything... but some of the questions you ask below cross a lot of jursidictional boundaries. From my brief look, it seems to be less these barge configurations are allowed Allowable barge configurations are largely determined by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, because they are the ones that built and operate the locks and dams and dredge river channels to maintain navigability. and more you can go anywhere but don't crash. Mostly, except for: 1) Waterways or shorelines that are privately owned. 2) Wildlife refuges allow some uses but not others 3) Areas near dams or other infrastructure that would be either dangerous or present security issues. Which is pretty much just like on land... Is this correct, or are there defined maximum sizes? Maximum boat sizes on inland waterways is largely a practical matter, although the U. S. Coast Guard has rules and regulations designed to promote safety (much like the NHTSA does for motor vehicles). In the same way that the size of the Panama Canal created the Panamax ship size, locks and dams control the size of boats on inland waterways. In either case, any idea what the suitable tags might look like (other than the generic boat=yes ship=yes)? I guess that depends on what you're trying to do... If you are trying to tag the largest possible vessel that can navigate a waterway (under normal conditions at least) you could probably come up with a reasonable set of tags. Inland waterways are highly dynamic though... -- Jeff Ollie ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. inland waterways
On 5/16/2012 1:06 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: In either case, any idea what the suitable tags might look like (other than the generic boat=yes ship=yes)? I guess that depends on what you're trying to do... If you are trying to tag the largest possible vessel that can navigate a waterway (under normal conditions at least) you could probably come up with a reasonable set of tags. Inland waterways are highly dynamic though... I'm trying to do something like the European tagging: http://www.itoworld.com/map/24 But there they have some sort of international treaty that defines configurations. Do you know of any reasonable way to define large vs. small? I know there's deep-draft shipping, but most inland waterways don't support that (since barges are apparently shallow-draft). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
