Template talk:Waterways legend/Archive 1

Railway line template

Junction icons

Towpath icon

Motorway bridge icon

Lock icon

Lock icon, more

Waterway status

Pumping stations & other buildings

Tunnel features

Winding holes

Coordinates and microformats

Editor

Legend

Weir icon

General comment on new legend

Rings

Template Category

Template Category (NEW!!)

Unwatered canal

Other uses

Moving to the template namespace

Transcluding Maps

Wharf icons

Dry Docks

Collapsible Maps

River Navigations

Proliferation of Icons

Swing/Draw bridge icon

BSicon_ugENDEa.svg

Howto/Beginners guide

Category:Icons for canal descriptions

Icons on commons

Collapsable Sections Broken

Waterway Status - Experiment

This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Waterways legend. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

The Railway line template (see Chase Line for an example) would seem to be suitable for use for drawing canal route diagrams, also. I've asked about adding the necessary extra icons; more input is needed there, please. Andy Mabbett 19:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Erewash Canal


					Derby Canal joining from Derby
				33	Sandiacre Lock

					M1 overpass
					M1 overpass again
					Nutbrook Canal Joining from Shipley
				31	Cotmanhay Bottom Lock

				29	Cotmanhay Top Lock

				27	Shipley Gate Lock

				26	Shipley Gate Aqueduct 15 m

				25	Eastwood Lock
					Erewash Canal to River Trent
					Nottingham Canal branching to Nottingham
				23	Langley Mill Basin
					Cromford Canal in use until 1944
					Butterley Tunnel 2712 m
					Cromford Canal in use until 1944
					Cromford

I've added the above sample as a talking point. Dark blue in this test piece indicates a navigable waterway and light blue a disused waterway. I've created one new icon for the M1 and the aqueduct by modifying existing icons which were licensed for free use in Wikimedia Commons. This is not meant to be an accurate description of the Erewash Canal it is a sample of the kind of Icons we need. I have also added a first attempt at a Lock icon. Martin Cordon 01:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I wonder whether a greater difference between the two blues would help at all? Salinae produced a schematic of the Cheshire Ring system that can be seen in the Canals in Cheshire article, and that made me think that perhaps some means, where needed, of indicating different stretches of canals might be worth considering at some point. I do like the example you have created so far, however. I'm not sure Salinae knows about this project, and so I'll alert him to it to see if he wants to contribute anything to it. DDStretch (talk) 09:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

That's great! I too, have trouble differentiating the shades of blue - would a dotted or dashed line be better? I think the lock icon needs to be replaced by two, one for "up" and one for "down" (and perhaps a third, where there is no change of level as such, but a link with, say, a tidal river). I would also not label the between-locks sections. What are the figures "13,1"? I've also requested, on the template's talk page, some assistance in looking at including columns for mileage and coordinates. Sadly one or two editors overreacted somewhat... Andy

Mabbett 09:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

The figures are supposed to represent mileages. They are not accurate at the moment. Creation of up, down and stop lock icons is not a problem. I could use dotted or dashed lines or even an entirely different colour. I'll prepare some samples and import them. Martin Cordon 11:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought locks were normally presented as \/ or /\, depending on the direction. Simply south 11:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This is why we are having a discussion. It makes sense to achieve consensus here before we start using route maps on actual articles. The icon suggested does have a \/ to indicate its direction as you would see if you clicked on the icon to see the full size image. Are you suggesting that the \/ needs to be more pronounced, or that there should be only one \/? Martin Cordon 12:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not that clear. Probably having it more pronounced would be better so maybe a sharper angle. Also, different directions, not just N + S but also E + W. Simply south 12:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks like two bars to me, not "\/". Andy Mabbett 12:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll make the \/ more pronounced and longer and see how that works. I've added a category for canal icons so that you can track changes. Martin Cordon 12:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Altered Lock icon added, some labelling removed mileages progressing in order. Martin Cordon 13:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks clearer now. I suppose later there will also be horizontal icons? Simply south 13:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

What about this File:BSicon uLock3.gif (sorry, it's a gif), with white where the chevrons are over the canal? Andy Mabbett 13:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

~~::::::Ummmmmm. Replaced Eastwood lock with what it would look like possibly, minus the branch on the left. Simply south 14:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)~~

~~Note: that is i have incorporated it onto the diagram above. Simply south 14:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)~~

Thank you. Seeing it that small, I think the arms need to be darker, too. Andy Mabbett 14:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I've modified the Lock icon as per the above suggestions. What do you think? Variations with differing directions can be produced once the initial format is agreed. Martin Cordon 18:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Much clearer - thank you. Wikipedia working at its best! ;-) Andy Mabbett 20:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal, being short, is a suitable test case. Andy Mabbett 22:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added a route map to Erewash Canal, I will change it as opinions within the project change. It is about as big as practical for this page. See what you think. Martin Cordon 14:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created a list of the icons so far used, just as a reference at User:Smurrayinchester/Waterways legend; it shows where there are gaps that need icons (such as various types of abandoned waterway). Laïka 14:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Both look good. A few minor points - the "legend" links to the railway legend. Do we extend this, or create as separate one? We really need a second lock icon, to show rise or fall. The distances need to be qualified (miles or km?). Was the Nottingham canal junction really only available from one direction? Can you mention the number of locks in each flight? I changes "River Trent Terminus" to just "River Trent". But, as I say, these are minor points. Andy Mabbett 15:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The distances are in km following the German model, I will qualify them. The Nottingham canal junction is indeed only available from one direction. It is necessary to turn around in the basin. All locks are single locks with one entry and one exit as per the icon. Martin Cordon 18:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the junction icons need to be T-junctions, or show a curve from each direction. At the moment, they're based on single-direction railway junction icons. We'll also need T-Junction icons for the top and bottom (i.e. literally like a "T"; and like an inverted "T"). Eventually, I think they'll all need to go on Commons, too. Andy Mabbett 20:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

There's already such junction icons: File:BSicon uABZld.svg for example gives a double-curve junction to the right. There's no T-junction yet, though; it may be better to use the double-curved one to make it clearer that the junction is easily navigable both ways, and because in the event that we have a T-junction where one exit has been abandoned/disused, we don't get a nasty looking right angle; smooth curves look best for schematics. Laïka 21:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

We now have the horizontal junctions too: uABZa and uABZe. Laïka 22:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to you too! Andy Mabbett 22:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need a 'traffic island' in the middle of the T- junction icons? Since they are usually just open areas of water, wouldn't it be ok to have them as all-blue, and discard the white bit? (It makes sense for railways to show distinct lines, but canal junctions often double-up as turning places.)

Where one arm of a junction is disused, for simplicity this could be shown in the adjacent icon, although combined light/dark junction icons could be made to show each combination.

EdJogg 00:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Two new icons without the traffic island have been made and uploaded. The left and right versions will be modified by someone else or by me when I wake up. Martin Cordon 01:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Left and Right junction icons added. Martin Cordon 13:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Bigg City Port

					Star Dock
					Zero Dock (disused)
					Lucky's Yard

					Up River
					Municipal Garbage Corporation
					Railway to Sodor
					Boat lift to River Ringo

I personally think this is a great idea. Incidentally, there's some images on Commons designed for use on the Amsterdam metro where a blue line is surrounded by red lines (commons:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/tube within railway): these would work very well either for tow paths or for dockyards (see right). More could be created as needed; the only problem is that red and blue don't give the best constrast, although it's still fairly obvious which is which. I'm also working on a boat lift logo, which should be ready in a minute. Laïka 20:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

And it's finished! (code is uLIFT*u, where the * is either an r for right, l for left, f for up, g for down (sorry for the weird letters; being a German based project, all pieces must follow this sort of pattern; the two u's ensure that (a) the piece is blue (b) the boat lift is on top). Laïka 20:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thank you. Andy Mabbett 21:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

IF we want to show the towpath – which I guess would only be on detailed maps – the towpath line should be substantially narrower than the waterway, with a little whitespace between the two.

Its use will also dramatically increase the number of icons required, since for each map component we will need (i) no towpath, (ii) left towpath, (iii) right, (iv) both, for each of (i) navigable, (ii) river, (iii) closed, (iv) dewatered, etc. That's an awful lot of icons.

I can see the point of showing bridges, locks, junctions, features, settlements, as they help to put everything into context. But why would we need to show the towpath, which is fairly clear on the ground, is shown on OS maps, and is clearly indicated in the specialist canal publications used by boaters?

(Sorry, this sounds rather 'angry', it's not meant to be hostile.)

EdJogg 22:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking more of using these icons for dockyards, wharfs, quays etc. , but since someone had suggested towpath icons elsewhere, I decided to mention towpaths as well in the response. In reality, towpaths would be too impractical, especially in urban areas, where the position of the path changes frequently. Laïka 22:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

'Dockyards, wharves and quays' -- seems sensible to try using the icons as you suggest, although grey or black might be easier on the eye! (And I'm glad we agree about the towpaths, that was pretty much my point, although I didn't say as much).

EdJogg 23:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

You're right; grey does look a lot better, and then there is also no confusion with railways which are marked on the same map. Laïka 23:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

As a test for 'Dockyards, wharves and quays' someone could have a go at Bristol Harbour where the image Bristolharbourmap.png could be used a s a basis.— Rod ^talk 08:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created a test page at User:Smurrayinchester/Bristolfashion. I'm not too keen with the dry-dock logo (between Baltic and Princes wharfs); it looks OK at full size, but when it is miniaturised by the box it becomes very unclear. Laïka 10:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

All your locks appear to flow in the same direction! Andy Mabbett 13:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah; there's no downhill lock icon yet. Laïka 14:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

There is now.Martin Cordon 13:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

A red motorway looks weird. Motorways are 'ALWAYS' shown in blue. Obviously this poses some problems for us, so maybe a bright blue could be used? Black outlining would help further.

EdJogg 23:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest having two versions; a light blue version for motorway (as the motorway should be labelled in the notes section, this shouldn't be too confusing) and a green version for other major roads which cross the canal, based on the green colour for A-roads. Laïka 09:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. Do we need one for minor roads (? yellow) & what about railway bridges?— Rod ^talk 10:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Presumably, railways can simply use the red tiles which already exist, and to give a nice symmetry with the railway template. Laïka 10:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added a blue motorway icon and included it in the above sample for comparison. Martin Cordon 11:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

OK by me. Andy Mabbett 13:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Are we doing a separate icon for swing bridges (BWB key)? Also how do we differentiate between lock and bridge numbering? Rod ^talk 16:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Blue motorway bridge is much better, although a white 'central reservation' might look more 'natural'. (Again, this would be consistent with others' map representations of a motorway). For the other road bridges, I still think the red looks odd. It is probably the colour used for the outline/central bar – black might work better. Also, might be nice to have a complete set, again following the OS/Highways Agency colour conventions: Motorway, blue/white; Trunk, green/yellow; Major route, red/black outline; Minor, yellow, black outline; Unclassified, white/black outline. This is likely to be clearer to those not familiar with the canal. Incidentally, are there any instances of canal aqueducts over motorways?

EdJogg 00:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The central reservation is white, you need to click on the icon to see this clearly. Martin Cordon 01:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You're right, but when icon-sized it definitely renders as pale blue on my monitor. Could the reservation be made slightly wider?

EdJogg 01:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The Lichfield Canal Aqueduct goes over the M6 toll. I don't think they have connected it to the canal yet though.Geni 23:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Could I suggest a further tweak of the lock icon? Instead of showing two sets of lock gates, why not combine them into one thicker 'V' – this might allow the original grey ones to be re-used. Doing this opens up the possibility of icons using multiple 'V's for flights and staircases, or, as used in some maps, an elongated hollow 'V' for a series of locks close together. EdJogg 23:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Maps generally use a pair of gates (as, indeed do locks!). We could use a thick grey chevron (like File:BSicon_uLock4.gif), with front and back edges in black, to recreate that effect, I suppose. Andy Mabbett 23:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

How would you represent a flight with side pounds eg Caen Hill Locks? If you do a canal such the Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal with 107 locks + all the bridges aqueducts etc isn't this going to be an extremely long graphic?— Rod ^talk 09:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

On the main canal page, I would use a single "lock" graphic, and a text note, such as "Caen Hill Locks and side-pounds" or "Anytown Locks (flight of 12)". If appropriate, I'd use the more detailed map on the article about the specific flight. Likewise, on long canal routes I would only show major bridges, etc. - just as happens with railways which use these templates. That said, were not going to resolve some of these issues 'til we try them in practice. What do folks think of my suggested new icon? Andy Mabbett 11:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

BSicon_uLock3 is the icon I prefer so far. It is the icon which looks most like that which it is intended to represent. An extra chevron could be added for flights of locks. Adding in more than one would overcrowd the image. Martin Cordon 11:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added a lock icon opening in the opposite direction. Martin Cordon 19:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Short canals with small numbers of features can have lots of detail. Long canals with many features will have their features grouped together. Erewash Canal has 14 locks, one aqueduct and 6 junctions, it is, I believe about as big as these route diagrams should be. Anything more complicated will have to have less detail. Martin Cordon 20:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you then have a look at User:Rodw/Sandbox/kandaschematic where I have been playing with the Kennet and Avon Canal (107 locks). I've left out loads of bridges etc but can you suggest what else should be left out, or grouped together?— Rod ^talk 20:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a long one! ;-) I would suggest omitting the "spacer" lengths, and perhaps splitting it into two or three segments. Andy Mabbett 21:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Consider leaving out features such as some of the road crossings, which are not directly relevent to the canal. Martin Cordon 22:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Water flows from bottom to top on uLock3 and top to bottom on uLock5 not in the direction the V's point. Consider the way in which Lock gates open. Martin Cordon 22:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It would probably be too much hassle now, really, but it would feel more natural if the coastal end (the end at Bristol Harbour) was at the bottom, although if that is the order that the locks are numbered in, then leave it that way. Also, what do the "70 ft" sections represent? Laïka 22:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Having examined the test cases created so far, I am even more convinced of my original views. Every single lock on Erewash canal is labelled as 'single', which is the case for the majority of locks in this country. If the icon used does not convey this adequately, the icon needs to be changed. Looking at it another way, the two sets of gates are unlikely to be much more than 70ft apart, so on the scale of any of these maps the gates would not appear separated! I think it would be much clearer if a single chevron is used for a single lock – possibly slightly thicker than the current one. This is how locks are shown on OS maps, so we have a good precedent to follow.

Flights of locks need a separate icon (and staircases a different one again?) since they are rarer beasts and rather more significant than your average lock. The Caen Hill flight is a major, major feature of the K&A, yet it is shown in a single icon (as it represents 29 locks, I would expect two icons, at least). Using two icons also permits the name of the flight to be stated on a line above the number of locks in the flight. A suitable icon would be a white 'box' with V-shaped ends; one, two and three -icon versions would give flexibility to cope with different length flights.

As for numbering, how about captions like 'Barrett's Lock (16)' or 'Seend Locks (flight of five locks, 17-21)? Alternatively, since the templates make the last field text right-justified, for each lock we could add something like: 'Barrett's Lock (lock 16)', which would also assist the distinction of bridge/lock numbering. (Although, do we really need to show the bridge numbers?) EdJogg 00:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I have an OS map in my possession with the Erewash Canal mapped, showing locks with two chevrons. I think perhaps OS change their convention depending on the map's scale. I agree that stating that a lock is single is over the top. I will give each lock its correct number, then the fact that it is single can be deduced from the presence of a single number. Martin Cordon 00:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Using the OS's own on-line 'Get a Map' service, I checked Burpham and Stoke locks on the River Wey (my 'locals'!) On the Landranger series (1:50,000) they use a single chevron. For the 1:25,000 version, the on-line maps are not clear enough to see how the locks are marked, but at that scale they show individual house boundaries, so I suspect that they show locks with as many gates as are fitted! So, maybe the OS is not such a good example to follow...

A much nearer example of what we are trying to achieve is the Wey & Arun site's series of maps. These use a single chevron to denote a lock, however they show other features in more detail, and also indicate whether the canal section is 'in water' or not. The Kennet & Avon site follows much the same idea, using a single chevron, (K&A summit section route map), so you can perhaps see that I am not alone in my view!

EdJogg 01:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Removing a chevron from the two gate single lock prevents us from using the single chevron for a single gated stop lock or flood gate. Martin Cordon 01:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right, I hadn't thought of that (and no-one else has mentioned it so far either!)

OK, how about a different approach - what about adding some lock sides? I'm thinking of just a couple of narrow grey lines, no wider than the 'beams' of the lock gates (ie each ~1/3rd the width of the canal), connecting the two sets of gates together. This would highlight that the two sets of gates are connected as a single structure.

EdJogg 01:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It might be worth looking at the Nicholson Guides for canal-lock and other icons. Andy Mabbett 16:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added some single gate icons. I think that they should be used for single gated flood gates and stop locks but if editors want to use them for single locks, go ahead. I will edit any diagrams I make to fit in with the majority.

Martin Cordon 17:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added two staircase lock icons, uSTAIRd and uSTAIRu. These can be used in pairs for long flights of locks. Martin Cordon 01:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

After a first attempt at a route map (Template:Chesterfield Canal map) for the Chesterfield Canal, I think the current lock icons don't represent it at all clearly. There is a section with several flights of locks including some stairs, and these don't come out very well - in particular, it is difficult to understand where a lock icon is next to a stair icon; only the icon for a flight of locks stands out properly. I think it would work better if a single lock was represented by a single chevron, and the icons for a flight and a stair were swapped around. Of course this leaves us with the problem of what do to to represent a single gate; perhaps a similar icon with the line of the gate crossing the canal directly, instead of in a V-shape? --VinceBowdren 21:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I use a single chevron for a simple lock as it stands out better. I think I would use the same for a single stop gate, with explanation in the text column. Oosoom ^Talk to me 09:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to start using the single-gate icon for a lock (even though as I say it would be a better icon for the Chesterfiedl canal map); both for consistency (that's one of the aims of a wikiproject) and to make it future-proof. If there is a collective decision to redesign the icons for locks, gates, stairs and flights then I customised maps could suddenly come out all wrong. --VinceBowdren 10:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I continue to use a single chevron for a single gated stop or flood lock and a double chevron for a standard single lock. As pointed out elsewhere, this is a matter of scale. Ordnance Survey maps show two individual gates on their more detailed maps and a single chevron on less detailed maps when indicating standard locks. I see no reason why scale can't dictate here. If the number of structures on a canal route is small, use twin chevrons, if the number is large use single chevrons. Martin Cordon 20:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to raise this again but I have been unable to find an OS map with a double chevron for a lock. The 1:50000 maps use a single chevron and the 1:25000 and smaller scale maps attempt to draw them in as features (narrowings and short lines for gates). Perhaps much older maps used two chevrons? Nicholson and Pearson use a single. Oosoom ^Talk to me 08:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

As previously stated in this discussion, I have in my possession an OS Landranger map dated from 1914 showing amongst other features, locks on the Erewash, Derby, Nutbrook and Cromford Canals. The locks are denoted with two chevrons. The scale is one inch to one mile. Martin Cordon 16:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I think conventions have changed somewhat since 1914. Have you any contemporary evidence? :) Oosoom ^Talk to me 17:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

If you go to the UK OS Maps website, pick a location with a lock and zoom in on it, the lock will be shown with both gates. This is contemporary. Martin Cordon 00:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I only see a single chevron on the 1:50000 maps and a narrowing on the 1:25000 maps on the Ordnance Survey Get-a-map site. See Wheaton Aston Lock 52°42′41″N 2°12′39″W / 52.7114°N 2.2108°W (grid reference SJ8576012696) (SJ858126). Looks the same if I go in via Ordnance Survey's home page. Can you give me a link please? Oosoom ^Talk to me 11:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Go to the OS website, choose a place near to a lock. I chose Sawley, use the search engine to find it, a map will appear, zoom in on the nearest lock. Martin Cordon 14:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you are interpreting the drawing on the 1:25000 (max zoom) map as chevrons. They are lines, as used to outline an object. At some angles they may look like a chevron, but at less than the width of the canal they are obviously not meant to be literal symbols. The only symbol used is on the 1:50000 maps and shows a single chevron >, not two. Maps of smaller scale than 1:50000 do not use a symbol and are not really any evidence of common usage. :) Oosoom ^Talk to me 17:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

My only reason for answering your comments is because your previous comments appeared to doubt the veracity of my earlier contributions to this discussion. I haven't really got anything new to say that I haven't already said in this discussion. If a majority of interested editors are of your opinion I will have no problem with complying. Martin Cordon 17:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it sufficient to use use just two shades of blue? The obvious distinction is between 'open' and 'closed' waterways, but for the latter, shouldn't we show whether the lengths are 'in water' or not? What about proposed waterways, river and/or tidal sections, etc?

EdJogg 23:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Dashed lines for planned, hollow centre for de-watered? Andy Mabbett 23:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

|Since there are quite a few different possiblities for the status of natural bodies of water (still, tidal, esturial, unnavigable river etc), rather than creating hundreds upon hundreds of different track types, perhaps instead the uGRENZE image could be used to mark tidal limits, navigable waters etc. For proposed routes, the railway template uses the same colour as for disused routes, with a note at the side stating either "disused" or "proposed". We could take this approach. Alternatively, light pink could represent one of the statuses; there's plenty of light pink icons available. Laïka 00:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The same problem exists for railways - some lines are simply disused, others have been entirely taken up. My feeling is that there are far too many combinations for it to be worthwhile distinguishing between the many kinds of disuse. AlexTiefling 10:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Here is what i think...

East Coast Main Line

Just for show obviously the icons should be in blue but for under construction it should show line in between and there should be 1 icon for this, at least for straight. Simply south 00:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

When you say a line in between, do you mean like this? Laïka 00:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Not quite.

East Coast Main Line

compare this to

East Coast Main Line

Still just for show but you see the difference between under construction and complete? Simply south 15:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. Unfortunately, that trick doesn't work on all browsers; my Firefox makes both lines look exactly the same. An alternative may be the dotted "LUECKE" piece: Laïka 16:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

East Coast Main Line

I prefer a dotted line, anyway. Andy Mabbett 16:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

So do I: dotted line for 'under construction', pale line for closed sections, 'change of waterway status' to indicate where tidal waters, etc, start. What about de-watered sections - scope for a 'white line with blue outline' type?

EdJogg 01:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be easier just to use the pink pieces; that would mean that most pieces would be available already; all we'd have to make would be some junction pieces. Laïka 07:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Certainly quicker and easier, and would allow creation of the maps without having to wait for icons. However, I am finding it hard to imagine canals shown in pink. If it were agreed that different (eg white, and blue or black) graphics were to be used, the pink icons could be copied and saved with the new names to use, allowing instant update later on, when someone had time to modify the graphics.

Just a sudden thought...instead of potentially complicated outline graphics, could use solid green instead of pink. This would be more realistic for a dewatered canal!

EdJogg 08:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created a test based on the Lichfield Canal; it has watered, unwatered and planned sections, so it's a fairly rigorous test of the tiles: User:Smurrayinchester/Bristolfashion. Laïka 14:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The colouring seems to work, although until I checked the Canal's website I wasn't entirely clear which sections were which – it might have helped if the proposed diversions were labelled 'Proposed Diversion'! :o) (So, does that mean the colours actually didn't work? Or is it sufficient for me to plead unfamiliarity with the icons?).

Comments:

Ogley 2nd and 3rd flights need separating by a plain stretch, as it looks to me like a single flight of 6 locks, rather than two flights of 4 and 6 locks respectively. This would slao better reflect the geographical situation – I see no harm in using two straights between features to emphasise that they are a long way apart, if this improves the clarity of the diagram.
Lock 29 looks like a flight of two locks (sorry to labour this point, but I found it hard to work out how many locks were present anywhere on this canal, and I shouldn't have to count how many arrows are present!)
You have used the 'abrupt end' symbols where the canal changes, did you try the 'change of status' symbols for a more subtle effect? (The change of colour should be fairly clear on its own, but a black line highlights it). Should they both be available – one to indicate a man-made dam, and the other to simply indicate that the water dries up naturally at that point?
The 'proposed lock' symbol is not as clear as it might be. The gates are a better size (thickness), but the fact that normal locks have a white point too means the discontinuous line under the 'proposed lock' is less obvious. (Labouring the same point again, sorry, but if the lock had a single arrow in the middle, there would be more clear space either side of the gate to see whether the line was solid or broken.) Obviously, the two icons will need to use the same lock gates eventually!
We need more dotted variants: curves, horizontal, junctions,...
The diversions are shown as T-junctions, whereas I would have thought they might be distinctly angled (ie 'unidirectional') – this would also apply where rivers join/leave, since this will emphasise the direction of flow.
Where does the pale blue variant of the lines fit in, and which would be used for unnavigable river sections?
I like the new drydock symbol -- much clearer.

Phew! Hope that doesn't seem like a complete demolition job, it is supposed to be constructive criticism!

EdJogg 15:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I like the dry docks too. The locks are numbered so you don't need to count arrows. Martin Cordon 16:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

How should we represent pumping stations & the like? I've started playing in my sandbox at User:Rodw/Sandbox/kandaschematic for the Kennet & Avon, as it's the only way I find I can identify problems & other features needed - feel free to edit.— Rod ^talk 10:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Should we also be able to represent marina's etc?— Rod ^talk 10:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Marinas can use something like this image, while pumping stations etc. could possibly use one of the blank circles, such as this one. Laïka 10:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Marina symbol looks quite distinctive, but the red circles for Crofton/Claverton seem detached, and don't really indicate anything to me. Perhaps create a straight (uSTR) icon with a simple black rectangle to one side? (Obviously would then need left/right versions.)

EdJogg 01:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

How about this image and this image for pumping stations or buildings? Oosoom ^Talk to me 11:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Neat. Please could we have the same pair, but without the chimney, too? Andy Mabbett 13:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. building and building by canal. Oosoom ^Talk to me 14:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again Andy Mabbett 14:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

For Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal, for example, we need single tunnel-portals for each direction, and air-vent icons. Perhaps also a "tunnel mid-point" icon, for mileage purposes. Can someone oblige, please? Where, say, a motorway crosses a canal in a tunnel, do we use the regular icon, or a special "in tunnel" version?Andy Mabbett 15:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

If the canal is in a tunnel and a motorway goes over, use the motorway going over with the canal in tunnel. If the canal is in the open but going underneath, use a road bridge icon. Simply south 16:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

There's already pieces for marking midpoints etc: normal and tunnel. It should be quite simple to convert these to blue. As for air vents, do we really need icons for these? What about simply using a plain tunnel piece and marking it as "air vent" in the notes? Laïka 16:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

"As for air vents, do we really need icons for these?" I think we need something, maybe a "tunnel feature" icon, along the lines of File:BSicon uHST.svg. Andy Mabbett 16:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, you could try using File:BSicon utHST.svg. I've created some parallel tunnels, and put them at User:Smurrayinchester/Waterways legend. Laïka 16:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Now created. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett 16:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The K&A example shows winding holes (presumably) as a canal basin, indicated by '70ft'. Surely these are always to one side of the canal, or the other? (Hence new icons?)

EdJogg 01:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Again using Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal as an example, I'd like to look at how the coordinates can be merged into the route map, using {{coord}} and hCard mark-up. Andy Mabbett 15:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to pipe a coordinate link? If it is, you could link the mile-markers to the co-ordinates, so that way, the co-ordinates are there, but not intrusive. Laïka 16:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

No, the coordinates need to be visible (there is a user-CSS hack to hide them, though). Andy Mabbett 16:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to be able to use, say:

{{BS|uABZa||BCN - Dudley Port Junction|{{coord|52.52204|-2.04331|region:GB_type:landmark}}}}

but would settle for:

{{BS|uABZa||BCN - Dudley Port Junction|52.52204|-2.04331|region:GB_type:landmark}}

if that transcluded to {{coord}}. Andy Mabbett 17:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Is there a good SVG editor, for Windows, for making and adapting these icons? Andy Mabbett 16:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've not really used it, and when I have, it has been on Linux, but Sodipodi might fit the bill. DDStretch (talk) 16:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

This link might be a better one for sodipodi. DDStretch (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

And more general links, but most of the software needs you to pay money: see here. DDStretch (talk) 16:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I use Inkscape; it's pretty easy to use, and it's free. Laïka 16:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

hah! Beat me to it! I was just going to put in a mention for inkscape as well, after tracking it down and reading about its features. DDStretch (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Strip-maps developed using BS-header & BS-table default to a red title box and a legend aimed at railway use (originally derived from German railways). Should a more appropriate colour (blue? and legend be used for this project? To avoid any problems as the ukw standards develop further, perhaps the BS templates could all be cloned to give uBS or equivalent (perhaps ukw is more apporiate?) variants? I appreciate this may involve a fair amount of effort, but it will be easier now, when it is relatively new, than later, once it has grown even more than it has so far. Any thoughts? Regards, Lynbarn 17:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

A new legend is needed, railways use these icons differently to Canals. Martin Cordon 18:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

What will happen when railways and canals are on the same map? Andy Mabbett 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicating templates is, I believe, a bad thing. It means they can become out of synch, or at least require twice as much work if changes are made. Andy Mabbett 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Can the legend be disabled on canal pages? Martin Cordon 19:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, {{BS-table}} includes the legend, {{BS-table1}} doesn't. A second alternative template (or some additional coding) would be required to use a ukw waterways-based legend (as it stands, the legend is far from comprehensive, even for German railway use). Ideally, the original German Railway templates could have been written to allow for various paramater-based variations, but I doubt the original authors foresaw the other uses to which these templates could be put, and it is probably too late now to re-engineer them all, so cloning at least some ofthe original templates is the only realistic option. Lynbarn 08:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It would be easier to make a different header for use in canal pages linking to a canal-based legend (it's only {{BS-table}} that produces the legend bit; making a new one for canals would be easy). Laïka 19:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Laika and Lynbarn. Adding lots of canal icons to the railways legend will probably offend railway people. Changing the description of a station icon to indicate that it is in fact a canal basin may also cause offense. When Canal editors need railway icons on canal descriptions the relevent icons can be added to the legend. I suspect that we are going to need an icon request option on the project page and a request for the listing of icons in the legend. Laika appears to be correct making a canal specific legend seems straightforward. Martin Cordon 19:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Note [1]. Andy Mabbett 09:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

We need some sort of image for a weir. I've come up with an icon (File:BSicon uWEIRe.svg), but it's not very clear what it is and doesn't scale well to small sizes. What do most maps use to represent weirs? (The OS doesn't seem to be much good; they just put a line through the water and the word "WEIR"). Laïka 10:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've found the need for a weir icon as well. We are going to need them for river navigations. If you look down at a weir using Googleearth or Local.Live you see a white band across the river with a straight edge upstream and a jagged edge downstream. Perhaps this could be translated into an icon, perhaps not. PS. There is an aqueduct over river icon in use which does not appear in your legend. Martin Cordon 10:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we also need an icon for the non-navigable part of a river, Like "~" in the following, awful, ASII art:

    |       | = canal
   /|
  W |       W = weir
  ~ F       F = canal feature
  ~ L       L = Lock 
   Y        Y = river rejoins
   |

Andy Mabbett 10:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created a new one which looks a little better based on the lock icon. For the non-navigable section, I'd still recommend uGRENZE. And I've moved the legend to a subpage of WikiProject UK Waterways, Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Waterways/Waterways legend, so anyone can edit it. Laïka 12:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

First Class piece of work which I am already using. Martin Cordon 17:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Anyone fancy trying to make a map for a ring, for example the Warwickshire ring? Andy Mabbett 11:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest a category for UK Waterways Templates. Martin Cordon 17:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Category Templates for UK Waterways has been created. Martin Cordon 20:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

IMPORTANT

When adding templates to this category, make sure you add the following at the bottom:

<noinclude>[[Category:Templates for UK Waterways]]</noinclude>

The 'noinclude' is essential to prevent the template from carrying its category over into the articles where it is used.

There may be a more pertinent place to locate this warning, in which case, could someone please copy it there?

EdJogg 20:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning, I will watch for this in future. Martin Cordon 21:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to Martin for creating the cat in the first place.

However, I discovered that template categories should belong together, hence I have created the following hierarchy under
Category:Transportation templates:

Category:Water transport templates
- Category:Waterway routemap templates
  - Category:United Kingdom waterway routemap templates

This last one has not been created yet since that could be seen as over-categorisation at this stage. However, it is expected to be needed, so, with that in mind, I have created the sub-template {{UK-waterway-routemap}}. When added to the bottom of a routemap template (as shown below) this will add the appropriate template category and some generic instructions about the routemap (yet to be written, but could usefully include a link to the page listing the icons).

By using a sub-template, it is an easy matter to move all the routemaps to a UK-specific sub-cat in the future, in a single hit.

Add following code to end of templated routemap:

<noinclude>
 {{UK-waterway-routemap}}
 </noinclude>

I have already moved all existing templates from Category:Templates for UK Waterways, and this may now be earmarked for CfD.

EdJogg 13:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Not quite sure what is meant by unwatered canal. Does the basic shape of the path have to still exist, perhaps as a walkway, or does it also apply to the track of canals totally lost and built over, perhaps by a factory or housing? Would green be suitable for that? Oosoom ^Talk to me 19:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a reply to an old comment, but in the absense of any other suitable colours for non-existent canal, I've used it for both unwatered/dry sections where the canal is easily distinguished (Llanymynech Branch of the Ellesmere Canal) and in sections where the canal has been infilled and built over (Newtown on the Montgomery Canal). Hmallett 20:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

There's a discussion of using similar maps for footpaths which may be of interest. Andy Mabbett 11:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

See update: Talk:Long-distance footpaths in the UK#Footpath Icons. Andy Mabbett 20:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Since we are linking this legend from various articles in the article namespace, I moved this page from the Wikipedia namespace to the template namespace as per WP:SELF. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I've started work on a route map for the Peak Forest Canal, and got to thinking! Given that the route maps consist of many lines of code, and that the code would be both disruptive to a prospective text-editor, and prone to inadvertent damage...

Do people agree that it makes sense to create the maps as a separate page and transclude that page (as has been done for {{BCN Main Line}})
Are we going to upset somebody if we put a static map that will only be used on a single page into Template: namespace
Should we actually be creating the maps in article namespace with a naming convention of "Name of Canal map" and transcluding as {{:BCN Main Line map}})

Thoughts?

Mayalld 07:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense - that seems to be what they do with the train-line route maps, and they invented the thing. Agreeing a good naming convention would be sensible, but the rail articles aren't quite so much help there; East Coast Main Line transcludes Template:ECML article for example, while West Coast Main Line transcludes Template:West Coast Main Line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VinceBowdren (talk • contribs) 09:47, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be a few such templates underway, which can be browsed at Category:Waterway_routemap_templates. Not much consistency in naming so far, so I would go with your convention of "<name of canal> map". --VinceBowdren 10:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It would be nice to have icons that show a wharf on only one side

whfSTRl
whfSTRr
whfHSTRf
whfHSTRg

Mayalld 09:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Would it be more appropriate if the blue inside the dry dock were a lighter colour to distinguish it better from a lock?

Mayalld 09:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I've created Template:BS-table-canal/WithCollapsibles as an analogue of the WithCollapsibles version of Template:BS-table

Replace {{BS-table-canal}} with {{BS-table-canal/WithCollapsibles}} at the start of the route map, and use;

{{BS5-startCollapsible|||utSTR||||Name of canal section}} . . {{BS-endCollapsible}} To wrap a section of canal to be initially collapsed.

See Peak Forest Canal for an example

Mayalld 10:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I've had a go at creating a map for the River Don Navigation User:Bob1960evens/Sandbox, using the dark blue icons for the navigable bits, and the light blue for the non-navigable bits. (Any comments would be most welcome.) However, the light blue icons are a bit limited. Is there a need for an 'e' variation on the four curves, the uGRENZE weir icon, and possibly the horizontal plain section (uHSTR) - see where the River Don turns off at the top, for instance. Thanks for all your work. Bob Evens 07:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I've added the horizontal plain unused section ueHSTR plus aqueduct over a major road uUAKRZu (now renamed to uAROADo) and aqueduct over minor road uUKRZuy (now renamed to uBROADo, but cannot find how to change the colours to create a ueSTRlf from uSTRlf. Does anyone know how the naming convention works? I've tried to follow what is already there, I think. Bob1960evens 20:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on your entry to canal icon creation. I have very recently been encouraged to create icons on Commons and would suggest the same to you if you can face the hassle. Then the icons can be used on other Wikis. Remember to put the icons in a category so that others can find them. ([[Category:Icons for canal descriptions]] on Commons, ~~or [[Category:Icons for Canal descriptions]] on English Wikipedia (different capitalisation)~~^{Now same on Wikipedia and Commons 24 September 2007}).

You can download and then edit SVG images as text files in Notepad. Don't ask me to explain the format, which is awful, but simple colour changes can be effected by changing the fil0= (or whatever) from one colour to another. I have just created the green bends File:BSicon ugSTRrf.svg etc from scratch to simplify manipulation (the red railway curves are lines with a hard-coded outline width and no fill - I couldn't find the colour to edit in Notepad) and also to simplify the licensing (I use public domain to encourage further development as the icons are hardly works of art). You could change the colour on these from 2CA05A to 6281C0.

The specifications seem to be: 500px x 500px. 20% width (100px) for main line. bridge grey=(128,160,128)=80A080. rail red=(190,45,44)=#be2d2c, pale red=(215,127,126)=#d77f7e. blue=(0,51,153)=#003399. pale blue=(98,129,192)=#6281C0. green=(44,160,90)=#2CA05A. (RGB colours (decimal), then in #hex. SVG language is in hex). Good luck. Oosoom ^Talk to me 10:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info and encouragement. I have modified your icons but not uploaded them yet, as I note that the original blue icons have code to draw stuff in either colour, and presumably switch between them somehow. Does anyone know if it is just the name that controls the colour, so uXXX uses blue, and ueXXX uses light blue? Bob1960evens 12:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I have not seen anything written down. It seems that XXX would be a red XXX from the railway series, uXXX the dark blue canal version, ugXXX the green version, and ueXXX would be light blue. It is up to the icon creator to use the correct colours to fit in with the conventions. Well done on the light blue curves. Oosoom ^Talk to me 19:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I have now created a light blue ueGRENZE icon, so am happy with my map, but am not sure what to do with it. Do I create a page called "River Don Navigation map" containing just the map, or does it go somewhere else? Also I am not sure if it should really be "Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation map", since it has been the SSYN since 1895. As for uploading to Commons, I haven't yet found a way to do that, but thanks for the suggestion. Bob1960evens 20:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Most maps seem to be stored in the article which uses them. There is no real need to keep them separate unless they are used in more than one article. As for naming, the article should be named after the most common/likely name of the waterway, so River Don Navigation if that is how it is known (without "The"). Don't forget to put it in one or more categories. Oosoom ^Talk to me 12:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I tend to put them in Template: space., for the simple reason that inlining them in an article; (1) fills the article up with code that the casual reader may find offputting when editing. (2) makes it more likely that somebody will accidentally edit the map.Mayalld 06:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Greeting to all. I have just been attempting a Medway Navigation and would welcome comment on the results. The principle source was a NRA leaflet, assisted by OS maps an AZ and a site visit. I could have used GeoHack to find more sources- but didn't. Please comment on the general result, and some specific issues:

is it acceptable to use full blue for the navigation and light blue for non-navigable rivers.
how should I represent an automatic sluice: suggest the symbol and I will draw one.
how should I represent Leigh barrier- I would like a GRENZE with full blue north, and light blue south: should I draw one: how should I name it
weirs- these terminate the navigation- I would like a GRENZE with full blue north, and light blue south: should I draw one: how should I name it
naming conventions: Bridges are BRÜCKE(n)so why are the names so different. In most cases the waterway passes under the Footpath/Pfad/Füssweg, Minorroad/Strasse, Majorroad/Hauptstrasse, Motorway/Freeway/Autobahn so this is the default and if not it is over/oben. Would it be profitable toalter the naming convention and transclude the icons from the deprecated name?
Naming convention : As uSTR -> ueSTR when non navigable, can some one explain why uxAKRZu -> uxAKRZu when it could be ueAKRZu?
Most of my LOCKs have a weir to the left or weir to the right- it would be good to have all this information on one tile, as in ISLAND. Porter's Lock, East Lock.
Many of my locks have a stream that joins them at the weir: Oak Weir Lock.

So, sorry if I have trodden on anyones sensitivities- just tell me which icons are needed and what I should call them and how they should be tagged

ClemRutter (talk) 00:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The number of icons seems to be proliferating, as we now have a green set as well, and once you start using green icons, you need some of the other icons also in green, so I wondered if it is time to extend the Smurrayinchester/Canalrow which is used to display them on the legend page, to include at least two extra columns. I have had a go so you can judge if you think it is a good idea.

x = canal not in use
t = tunnel
e = feature not in use
ex = canal and feature not in use
g = canal unwatered
xg = feature unwatered
tg = unwatered tunnel
L = planned / under construction

Basic structure
ID `(below)` Prefix `(right)`	x	t	e	ex	g	xg	tg	L	symbolises
uHST									Canal basin
uSTR					File:BSicon ugSTR.svg		File:BSicon ugtSTR.svg		Plain section
uSTRlf					File:BSicon ugSTRlf.svg				Curve
uSTRrf					File:BSicon ugSTRrf.svg				Curve
uSTRq					File:BSicon ugSTRq.svg				Horizontal section
uJUNCld									T-junction to right
uTUNNEL1					File:BSicon ugTUNNEL1.svg				Short Tunnel

I added the light blue curve icons as ueSTRlf, etc, because the vertical plain section was already ueSTR, but in view of the table headings, I think they all ought to be in the ux column, since they show the canal not in use, rather than a feature. Also I wonder if I have named the new aqueducts wrongly, since the aqueduct over major road is now aUARKZu, whereas I think I should have called it uARKZo, since that is how the railway aqueducts work. If the unwatered bridge (uGBRÜCKE) was renamed ugBRÜCKE it would fit into the grid better, and I really struggle to find the umlaut, so could the bridges be renamed ugBRUCKE? I'd be happy to sort this out if there is general agreement. Bob1960evens 12:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

In reverse order, (1) if you open the edit page and look below the [Save page], [Show preview] and [show changes] buttons, you will find this lot: Á á Ć ć É é Í í Ĺ ĺ Ń ń Ó ó Ŕ ŕ Ś ś Ú ú Ý ý Ź ź À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù Â â Ĉ ĉ Ê ê Ĝ ĝ Ĥ ĥ Î î Ĵ ĵ Ô ô Ŝ ŝ Û û Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü Ÿ ÿ ß Ã ã Ẽ ẽ Ĩ ĩ Ñ ñ Õ õ Ũ ũ Ỹ ỹ Ç ç Ģ ģ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ Đ đ Ů ů Ǎ ǎ Č č Ď ď Ě ě Ǐ ǐ Ľ ľ Ň ň Ǒ ǒ Ř ř Š š Ť ť Ǔ ǔ Ž ž Ā ā Ē ē Ī ī Ō ō Ū ū Ȳ ȳ Ǣ ǣ ǖ ǘ ǚ ǜ Ă ă Ĕ ĕ Ğ ğ Ĭ ĭ Ŏ ŏ Ŭ ŭ Ċ ċ Ė ė Ġ ġ İ ı Ż ż Ą ą Ę ę Į į Ǫ ǫ Ų ų Ḍ ḍ Ḥ ḥ Ḷ ḷ Ḹ ḹ Ṃ ṃ Ṇ ṇ Ṛ ṛ Ṝ ṝ Ṣ ṣ Ṭ ṭ Ł ł Ő ő Ű ű Ŀ ŀ Ħ ħ Ð ð Þ þ Œ œ Æ æ Ø ø Å å Ə ə . So it is just a matter of copy & paste. On this basis, I don't consider that ugBRUCKE is needed just yet. (2) I like your suggestion for new (green) icons & new columns in the table. Great idea. I'd also like some pale red railway icons, such as uKRZu & uKRZo, for closed railways. I tried to make an euKRZu icon, using an SVG plugin in Explorer (I normally use Firefox), to edit the source code from #be2d2c to #d77f7e, but I could not make an image from it.Pyrotec 17:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

There are already icons called ueKRZu and ueKRZo, available since April 17, so I will add them to the template. Bob1960evens 18:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I had this very same thought the other day, but the diverse naming issues put me off saying anything. With the expanded template in use, such naming issues should be avoided in the future. I would recommend moving all mis-named icons 'now', since the longer it is left, the larger a job it will be! -- EdJogg 14:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

We need some green lock series - up, down, left and right. I'll have a play around with the existing svg files (changing blue to green), but what will be their new names?Pyrotec 19:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

If you start from uLock3, the green lock pointing in the same direction will be ugLock3. Please note the 'g' is lower case. I am not sure why locks use 3 and 5 for up and down, where most symbols use 'f' and 'g' (presumably from the German). However, there already appears to be green locks in all 4 directions, but not all are in the template.Bob1960evens 20:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I found those, but I was looked for green equivalents of uLOCKSu,uLOCKSd, uLOCKSl & uLOCKSr. As I did not find those, I made some at home, but I've not tried uploading them.Pyrotec 20:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

First one uploaded as uLOCKSr green.Pyrotec 20:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Loaded the others as uLOCKSg_green,uLOCKSr_green, and uLOCKSl_green.Pyrotec 20:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but they won't fit on the template with the word green on the end. The 'g' needs to go immediately after the 'u', so they would be ugLOCKSr. Then you can put them next to the other LOCKSr on the template page. I was trying to upload green stoplocks as well, but the uploading process changed the initial 'u' to a 'U', and that doesn't work either. Bob1960evens 21:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I've pasted in the new template. I just wonder how many other icons have been created which should be on it. I have taken the liberty of creating a uLSTR to replace th LUEKE, so it follows the rules, and renamed uGBRÜCKE to ugBRÜCKE. The wharfs also break all the rules, so I'll ponder them. Bob1960evens 20:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I am inclined to replace my earlier attempt at a swing/swivel bridge with a more graphic represention. Any comments? Oosoom ^Talk to me 10:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

For ~~comparison~~ new icons (old version now overlaid), see map on right:

Anyold Canal

					Lock 4
					A34 road

					Swing bridge
					Lift bridge

					Lock 6
					Farm bridge

Oosoom ^Talk to me 12:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Is that going to be clear enough at lower resolution? The current one looks alright to me. --VinceBowdren 11:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but it looks like a lift bridge to me:( Derek Andrews 19:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

You are completely right. I drew it as a drawbridge and meant it to represent an opening (swing or lift) bridge (as described on the legend page). Wrote the wrong description here. Sorry. Oosoom ^Talk to me 23:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I like the new icon. I think it is a bit more obvious what it represents. Bob1960evens 17:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I like it too. I'd be inclined to move to separate icons for swing bridge and lift bridge Mayalld 06:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

How about File:BSicon uSWING1.svg. Oosoom ^Talk to me 09:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Perfect! Mayalld 13:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Great work. Will one of them replace the existing uSWING, or will we end up with three icons? Bob Evens 16:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure we only need two, but with what names? Oosoom ^Talk to me 17:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

How about uSWING and uLIFT? It would mean that all of the existing Lift and Swing bridges would appear as the new Swing bridge, but there are not too many maps to check, if we act soon. Bob1960evens 20:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Have uploaded uLIFT to Commons and will reload uSWING with the new picture. Oosoom ^Talk to me 22:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

And updated Legend and other articles which used uSWING. Oosoom ^Talk to me 22:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone agree that BSicon_ugENDEa: File:BSicon ugENDEa.svg and BSicon_ugENDEe: File:BSicon ugENDEe.svg are misnamed as they are not the same shape as their u- equivalents, ie abrupt end BSicon_uENDEa: and BSicon_uENDEe: ? There should be another image name for transition blue/green. What should it be? Oosoom ^Talk to me 14:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that there needs to be a new image name for status transitions. TRANS might be suitable main part of the name. (Isn't there a limit on how many characters can be used?) Hmallett 14:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I created them, and took inspiration from the large waterway source, which uses a different shape for the 'x' variation. I am happy for them to be renamed, but to fit into the grid, there needs to be a standard icon of the same type, to fit into the first column. I had the same problem with the BSicon_ugBASINr: File:BSicon ugBASINr.svg, where I had to create a BSicon_uKHSTr:

in order to show it on the grid. Bob1960evens 16:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

While we are at it, is there any consensus for changing the names of the Wharfs and Docks so that they at least have the initial 'u' in them? I had to create a special row to display them on the Legend, because they do not follow the same naming convention. I wondered about uWHARF, uHWHARF, uDOCKf/g/l/r. I would be quite happy to trawl through the existing maps and modify them if we followed this route. Bob1960evens 16:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I would say that if the u is required for consistency, then we should have the u. Anything to avoid having to do things manually, like create special rows. Hmallett 13:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I have created a BSicon_uTRANSf:

and a BSicon_ugTRANSf:

on Commons, but noticed that the original BSicon_ugENDEa: File:BSicon ugENDEa.svg and BSicon_ugENDEe: File:BSicon ugENDEe.svg were created by Smurrayinchester and not me as stated above. Bob1960evens 18:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I have now created a BSicon_ugTRANSg:

on Commons as well, have put them on the legend, and adjusted all maps to use the new symbols. Bob1960evens 21:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if this is the right place to mention, but I've put a total beginner's guide to creating waterways routemaps at User:Hmallett. Hmallett 22:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. Is it worth mentioning the BS2, BS3 and BS5 options for multi-column maps? Bob1960evens 15:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that (for now) total beginners will only do BS maps. Maybe I'll do more complex ones in the future. Hmallett 14:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Please note that the category on Enghlish Wikipedia has now been renamed to fall into line with Manual of Style on category names (lower case) and that it now is the same as the category on Commons. Oosoom ^Talk to me 09:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

... are not the same as in english wikipedia? Locks are different, junctions are missing ... ?! --89.50.96.19 23:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying that the same image name is showing different pictures on the two wikis? Which names? Oosoom ^Talk to me 08:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

No. Nice english locks :-) are not on commons, also junctions and so on ... the sets of icons are really different ... --89.58.101.81 01:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Under construction

Anyone know what has happened to collapsible sections? They no longer line up with the non-collapsable bits. See Trent Lock or Calder and Hebble Navigation. Bob1960evens (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It's because the BS templates icons were switched to 22px, but the user who switched them (User:Oahiyeel) did not do so in the collapsible templates too. I guess it's fine now. – PeterCX&Talk 15:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)