Steve Chilton wrote: > Have submitted mapnik patches to SVN to render locks but unfortunately there > isn't a standard way of tagging that makes it easy to be comprehensive. > I have dealt with what I think are the two most logical options, which are: > > 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) > > This seems to fit with http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lock > > There are other variants in place (and I haven't look too hard). > For instance at Tardebigge > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.31229&lon=-2.03814&zoom=17&layers=0B00FTF > there is a variant to the east of Upper Gambolds bridge that has an extra > node for the lock which will throw the submitted rendering. >
I tag those in my area as a line, to include the lock_name with two POI's for the lock gates each of which has a distinguishing lock_ref such as 10 Upper & Lower Not sure what advantage mapping as an area has. In my experience locks are the narrowest stretches of a canal. > > Does anyone want to try to help me to get a simplified schema that will cover > most options and allow sensible rendering? > Yes, I know there are variants like lock pounds, and multiple locks whose top > gate is the bottom of the next, etc. > Is there a beginners guide to this on the wiki? > > I could go round changing any instances I find that don't match the two > options above but would like any interested parties' thoughts first off. > > PS: deliberately not tried to render locks before because of inability to > render icons (eg a traditional lock arrow) at the angle of the way they are > on. So have used a round icon for the moment. Any thoughts on that welcome > too. > Doesn't the Tardebigge you give overcome this problem? > > Cheers > STEVE _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
