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.net>wrote: > 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