Render disused:power=* like power=*

[Penegal]

Expected behavior

Render disused:power=(cable|line|minor_line) like power=(cable|line|minor_line), as disused:* says that the features are still present, but no longer used.

Actual behavior

Not rendered.

Please note that I can take care of that myself, but first I would like a confirmation that this is relevant. IMO, it is, as these features are still visible in the landscape, hence justifying their display, but I can be wrong, for instance because disused:power=* is under a thousand occurrences. Rendering these could help spread the life cycle prefixes, though.

[Adamant36]

How do you tell the difference on the ground between a disused and used power line? There's some railroad tracks near where I live with older power lines along them. Most of the poles and lines have fallen over onto what use to be the old railroad track before they built a bridge (I should probably map that at some point). A few times I climbed up the downed poles to steal those glass covers they use to all have. Unfortunately they wouldn't come off though. So I scuttled back down. Since I'm at the age where even the slightest height makes me not want suffer the potential injury of a useless fall.

Anyway, if they are disused like that, I don't think they are worth rendering. At least not in the same way as normal ones. There should be a way to tell if they are "live" or not. I have no clue how the difference could be told or rendered though.

[Penegal]

In fact, the French tranport network manager publishes data about these lines, and tells whose are no longer used, but still kept functional. I didn't climb to check if they are live, though.

[Adamant36]

Hhmmm interesting. Good to know that goes for France at least. You were probably better off not checking yourself.

I should see if they have something similar here.

[sommerluk]

Usage:
line: 139
cable: 135
minor_line: 21

These values are quite low, on the other hand there would be no special rendering, so this would form a group together with the in-use counterpart, where the numbers are much higher.

The question is if to render it or not. I’m a little bit indecisive. Of course a disused supermarket should not render as a shopping feature because you cannot do any shopping any more. So in general it is a good idea not to render disused features. On the other hand maybe power lines are less a “feature” to use for average map user, but rather a landmark?

[kocio-pl]

Latest discussion about #3535 shown me that disused: is not as clear when applied to different kind of objects as it sounds when talking about shops. I guess this is a landmark indeed, similar to disused railways.

[Penegal]

@kocio-pl: my proposal was indeed caused by these features being a landmark.

[mboeringa]

In fact, the French tranport network manager publishes data about these lines, and tells whose are no longer used, but still kept functional. I didn't climb to check if they are live, though.

I am amazed they publish this kind of information. Here in the Netherlands, copper thiefs even rip out live power cables used to power train signaling systems and safety signals at railway crossings. A major headache for railway companies. Lives at risk for a few pennies just because raw material prices are up. Unbelievable...

[matkoniecz]

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/disused%3Apower#values - it seems that disused:power is extremely rare. I would close it and reopen once tag is more widely used (at least 1000+ uses of disused:power=cable / disused:power=line / disused:power=minor_line)

Note: it is not promise to render it once it reaches this threshold.

[jeisenbe]

I'm inclined to close this issue, both for the reasons above (#3608 (comment), #3608 (comment) and #3608 (comment)), and because it is not clear that disused:power=line is more correct than power=line + disused=yes.

Since there is no safe way to verify whether a power line, cable or tower is in use when checking a feature in person, it is reasonable for mappers to use power=* and then add disused=yes based on official sources when this information is available. We map and render these features mainly because they are good orientation landmarks in rural areas, so whether or not the line is carrying electrical current is not as relevant to most database users.

See also #2030 where we declined to render disused:railway like railway=disused, and similar discussion about disused:quarry in #3535.

However, if changes in mapping practice lead to a new consensus about this tagging in the future this issue could be reopened at that time.

[jeisenbe]

Now there are 443 ways with disused:power=line/minor_line/cable

But there are 430 power=line/minor_line/cable + disused=yes - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/NYx