<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Hi <br>
    </p>
    <p>I agree with you. Tagging something like this is difficult. The
      tagging depends on the reason for tagging, the Leeds &
      Liverpool canal is a relation which contains the water ways of
      this feature,  if the staircase locks are being tagged because of
      their tourism features then a relation containing all of the
      tourism objects is appropriate and tagged with appropriate
      heritage and tourism tags - I think at the relation level as the
      objects all combine to make the feature.</p>
    <p>Tony<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/08/2021 22:59, Tom Crocker wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHmUbmdTUOgv6qppjAa+OYENnimZ-mL_8AWiMRqOdiWOh76_Gw@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">Another thought on this. The site relation requires
        a main tag. That's fine for the piers with historic=heritage. It
        might also be alright for a lock flight where combined with
        place=locality if that's an appropriate tag, although you might
        argue it is an extant feature. The site page also points out
        there are many cases where the main tag is site=* and that is
        undocumented, although having browsed the first few pages on
        taginfo many seem like they could just be replaced with a
        documented tag. So, site=lock_flight would be an alternative
        possibility but perhaps not very desirable either.<br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 12:23,
          Tom Crocker <<a href="mailto:tomcrockermail@gmail.com"
            moz-do-not-send="true">tomcrockermail@gmail.com</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
          0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
          <div dir="auto">Hi Tony
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">I think you're right; that's a good relation
              to use for both those situations. I couldn't remember why
              it wasn't applicable in the cases I was interested in but
              (having now re-read) it's only for man-made nodes and open
              ways.</div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">Tom</div>
          </div>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 15 Aug 2021, 10:56
              Tony Shield, <<a href="mailto:tonyosm9@gmail.com"
                target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">tonyosm9@gmail.com</a>>
              wrote:<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <p>Hi,</p>
                <p>I've been having similar thoughts for listed
                  buildings of Historic England et al particularly gate
                  piers. I looked at type = site and type=group and
                  decided  to use type = site as site is in the wiki and
                  has 158K uses, group is not in the wiki and has 250
                  uses.</p>
                <p>But I might just be following all the other sheep ...
                  . .. . <br>
                </p>
                <p>Tony<br>
                </p>
                <div>On 14/08/2021 11:04, Michael Collinson wrote:<br>
                </div>
                <blockquote type="cite"> I've experimentally enhanced my
                  local Bingley Five Rise with both Edward's and Tom's
                  suggestions.<br>
                  <br>
                  <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/280721691"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/280721691</a><br>
                  <br>
                  My main motivation is how to highlight subjectively
                  "interesting" features for tourism and education
                  purposes with quantitative tagging. It is now possible
                  to find the general location as a tourism=attraction
                  and pull up full information about it, including all
                  the locks. This is where I am going with a personal
                  Android app.<br>
                  <br>
                  Being more serious about relations than my first
                  thread comment, I loathe the over-use and often
                  unnecessarily complex use of relations where a simpler
                  solution will suffice. That said, it took a two cups
                  of coffee research and thought but I think the not
                  well-liked 'group' relation does seem ideal here IF
                  you want more detail rather than just Where Is It?<br>
                  <br>
                  For Foxton Lock, I've followed Dave F's suggestion and
                  simply added more detail to the existing
                  place=locality tag. So, you can find it and know what
                  it is using free-form text, but doesn't say anything
                  quantitative about the locks themselves - perhaps that
                  just doesn't matter?<br>
                  <br>
                  <a
                    href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2413496279"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2413496279</a>
                  Foxton Locks<br>
                  <br>
                  I noticed that one can't find the Fort Augustus Flight
                  at all in OSM, so I have tried a half-way approach and
                  created a place=locality tag but put it on a group
                  relation:<br>
                  <br>
                  <a
                    href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13089161"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13089161</a>
                  Fort Augustus Lock Flight (that appears to be the
                  formal name), alt name Fort Augustus Locks<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  NOTE: The edits are experimental, so if anyone wants
                  to re-edit, FEEL FREE, (as long as it is not a
                  straight deletion!).<br>
                  <br>
                  Mike<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Other staircase locks mentioned in the thread or that
                  I stumbled across:<br>
                  <br>
                  <a
                    href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.35194/-2.02505"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.35194/-2.02505</a>
                  Caen Hill - Difficult to find in OSM, so definitely
                  needs some TLC<br>
                  <br>
                  <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/239118607"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/239118607</a>
                  Neptune's Staircase - Mapped as a tourism=attraction
                  on a single way bounding each lock pool.<br>
                  <br>
                  <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/330275022#map=15/53.1268/-2.6321"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/330275022#map=15/53.1268/-2.6321</a>
                  Bunbury Staircase Locks. Mapped as place=location,
                  tourism=attraction on a node<br>
                  <br>
                  <a
                    href="https://www.droitwichcanals.co.uk/page24.html"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.droitwichcanals.co.uk/page24.html</a>
                  :<br>
                  <br>
                  "<span>The largest narrow boat staircase is the
                    Watford locks which has four steps and is located on
                    the Leicester line of the Grand Union Canal.<br>
                    On the Droitwich Junction Canal we have a two
                    staircase lock - locks 4 & 5. The next nearest
                    Staircase lock are the Stourport locks on the
                    Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal"</span><br>
                  <br>
                  <div>On 2021-08-12 22:40, Edward Bainton wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="auto">Fort Augustus Flight on the
                      Caledonian Canal is also a staircase (pure
                      staircase afaik; no passing place).
                      <div dir="auto"><br>
                      </div>
                      <div dir="auto">I looked at the wiki. How about:</div>
                      <div dir="auto"><br>
                      </div>
                      <div dir="auto">waterway=canal<br>
                        lock=yes<br>
                        lock:type=staircase_lock<br>
                        [Other values: =tide_lock, etc? Pound lock
                        assumed]<br>
                        lock_number=1/5<br>
                        lock_name:flight=Fort Augustus Flight</div>
                      <br>
                      <div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
                        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 11 Aug
                          2021, 19:49 Philip Barnes, <<a
                            href="mailto:phil@trigpoint.me.uk"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                            moz-do-not-send="true">phil@trigpoint.me.uk</a>>
                          wrote:<br>
                        </div>
                        <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                          style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                          0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                          rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I would
                          have thought the obvious staircase locks to
                          look at is Foxton.<br>
                          <br>
                          I remember going there with the school. From
                          memory the gates are shared between locks with
                          a wide passing place in the middle of the
                          flight.<br>
                          <br>
                          Phil (trigpoint)<br>
                          <br>
                          On Wednesday, 11 August 2021, Tom Crocker
                          wrote:<br>
                          > On Wed, 11 Aug 2021, 16:41 Michael
                          Collinson, <<a
                            href="mailto:mike@ayeltd.biz"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mike@ayeltd.biz</a>>
                          wrote:<br>
                          > <br>
                          > > I would hazard a guess that you are
                          the first to think of it and the if<br>
                          > > anyone else has it will Richard
                          Fairhurst and possibly Gervase Markham,<br>
                          > > (not sure if he is still active?).<br>
                          > ><br>
                          > > Looking a Bingley Five Rise, in 2008
                          I (cyclist with very amateur interest<br>
                          > > in industrial heritage), mapped the
                          the lock gates themselves. In 2011,<br>
                          > > dysteleologist <<a
                            href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dysteleologist"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dysteleologist</a>>
                          with<br>
                          > > an interest in man-made waterways
                          thought to think of the locks themselves,<br>
                          > > creating canal way segments with
                          lock=yes. At that is as far as it has gone.<br>
                          > ><br>
                          > > Looks like a job for a relation?
                          [Slight shudder and exits stage left.]<br>
                          > ><br>
                          > > Mike<br>
                          > ><br>
                          > > <a
                            href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/53.85572/-1.83772"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/53.85572/-1.83772</a> 
                          Bingley Five Rise<br>
                          > ><br>
                          > <br>
                          > Looks like another case where a general
                          purpose group relation would be<br>
                          > useful such as<br>
                          > <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Group_Relation"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Group_Relation</a><br>
                          > Unfortunately I don't think there's any
                          support for it in renderers<br>
                          > currently.<br>
                          > <br>
                          > Tom<br>
                          > <br>
                          > ><br>
                          > ><br>
                          ><br>
                          <br>
                          -- <br>
                          Sent from my Sailfish device<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
                          Talk-GB mailing list<br>
                          <a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                          <a
                            href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
                            rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                            noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
                        </blockquote>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                    <br>
                    <fieldset></fieldset>
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <fieldset></fieldset>
                  <pre>_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              _______________________________________________<br>
              Talk-GB mailing list<br>
              <a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org"
                rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
              <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
                rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>