On 01/09/2010 20:53, Anthony wrote:
Can you pardon my laziness and tell me whether or not the water in
that part of the canal fills the entire tunnel.
It doesn't - there's a narrow footpath to the side (presumably where
boats were pulled along manually - the horses had to take the path over
the top of the hill I think).
However - imagine that such a waterway were being built now and there
wasn't a requirement for any sort of towpath. If it were still
navigable but you could still get a boat down it would it still be a
canal? I'd say yes, but others may differ.
Another case - imagine a stream (that runs overground but then dips
beneath and re-emerges. Here's one example I think:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.07919&lon=-2.16045&zoom=15&layers=M
If I remember correctly (although it's a few years since I've been
there) the stream that flows from Malham Tarn at the top goes down a
hole and re-emerges at Malham Cove at the bottom of the screen.
The "water sinks" node is here -
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/12792309 tagged as a
"cave_of_debouchement" (which is a new one on me but entirely
plausible). In this case the underground bit isn't mapped but if it
was, would it still be a waterway? I suspect that it'd be down to the
"duck test" and the mapper on the ground.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
