Proposed features/Mooring

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Mooring info should be attached to the relevant stretch of towpath, or to a new dedicated way on the opposite side, for the rare offside moorings. Use "mooring=yes/private/no", applied to ways rather than nodes. Only explicitly marked mooring conditions should be shown.

The current "waterway=mooring" is deprecated by this proposal, to be replaced with the above. This is both for semantic reasons - it's not an actual waterway receiving the tag - and so you can have multiple values, allowing you to indicate areas where mooring is forbidden.


mooring=yes/private/no, on ways.


E.g. mooring icon in centre of the way, perhaps with grey lines indicating the extent.


  • cost = free|paid? Ojw 08:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
    • or toll=yes|no|true|false as found elsewhere? --DrMark 14:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • doesn't the access= tag cover the private bit? this probably should be either yes or no, then the access covers the other part, separately. Myfanwy 10:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
    • No, because the mooring tag is on the towpath. Adding an access tag would make it seem as if the towpath was private for that section. You can have private moorings on an otherwise-public towpath. Gerv 18:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Should also include the ability to flag permited times/dates, such as 'no overnight mooring'. --Mungewell 18:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Can we also include the permitted duration? A lot of stretches of British Waterways free moorings on the canals are limited to e.g. 7 days or 14 days before you must move on. --POHB 09:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • There's a "maxstay" tag, just approved, for permitted duration. -- Gerv 10:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Would it be better to have the tag on the canal? waterway=canal, mooring=yes etc. That would make it like waterway=canal, lock=yes The mooring tag should also be applicable to nodes, as argued for locks. I have seen moorings where the access track was some distance from the canal. It seems artificial to tag the distant track rather than the canal where the boats are. Making a canal map is easier if the features are attached to the canal, rather than having the scan the entire map contents or some relations (not yet devised). The proposal also precludes implicit towpaths... Chrismorl 15:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • The tag can't be on the canal because then you can't indicate which bank the mooring relates to. (All UK canals other than the enormous ones are a single way rather than two banks.) I guess it could apply to nodes, although I've never seen mooring as a point feature. (Perhaps a floating buoy?) If the towpath or track were some distance from the canal, you would add another, dedicated way to denote the mooring, just as you would when the mooring was on the opposite side of the canal to the towpath. Also, with the tags on the canal, any access restrictions would seem to apply to the canal, not the mooring. Please, buy a canal map of the sort canal boaters use and see if your tagging proposals can include all the information the users of canals actually find necessary. :-) Gerv 16:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Canal ways have direction, so tags containing left and right can indicate the side. I wouldn't want to restrict all the additional tags (although they might have a prefix, which is reasonable for more specialist information): the discussion is what they are attached to. I think attaching canal-related features to the canal rather than making them free standing is more logical. If there was no canal there would be no mooring. There are similar comments on towpaths and bridge numbers (and the debate on bus stops and traffic signals is similar). OSM data is a collection of data, not a picture, and benefits from being as organised as is reasonable.
It would be a pity for the mooring tag not to be applicable to nodes. Just as for locks, a node requires less detail and so is more likely to be recorded by the less specialised contributor, and contains nearly the same information as a linear way at low zooms (when a free-standing mooring feature would also lose its side information) - stand back and look at the big picture! Chrismorl 20:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • This tag should be applicable to nodes. It would be helpful to map tiny, unofficial places suitable for mooring a boat. An example of such use is my post at OSM help. --Emes (talk) 17:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


  • I approve this proposal -- Gerv 19:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --PerroVerd 12:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal.--Walley 16:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Steven te Brinke 16:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Mungewell 18:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --Florianschmitt 21:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal. --DrMark 14:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I disapprove this proposal. It needs more thought, see above. Chrismorl 15:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)