When prefixing aerialway=cable_car to disused:aerialway=cable_car it disappears from map rendering.

It is still present as a landmark, though, and should be rendered, in my opinion. Is this wrong tagging?

Concerns Goldeck Pendelbahn, which stopped operating two years ago, but still exists.

asked 21 Sep, 16:17

ecuapac's gravatar image

ecuapac
564
accept rate: 0%


Using the disused: prefix is the correct way of tagging. The problem here is that we do not differ between mapping the function and the physical infrastructure. For a closed supermarket you would still have a building=yes together with the disused:shop=supermarket.

Of the physical infrastructure you can map the pylons aerialway=pylon as has been done for this cable car. However on a quick search I couldn't find a map that displays them.

It should be up to the map renderers to consider placing a disused:aerialway on the map. Openskimap is apparently doing so as a dotted line.

permanent link

answered 22 Sep, 07:36

TZorn's gravatar image

TZorn
6.8k232131
accept rate: 16%

It's a good question whether such a cableway pylon should still be aerialway=pylon. Changing to a non-purpose, structural disused:aerialway=pylon + man_made= =tower/=mast (a potential issue here is aerialway=pylon doesn't distinguish between structures as small as chairlifts to the biggest ones) may better reflect its status. Thinking about rendering can yet deepen the understanding on proper tagging.

(22 Sep, 08:10) Kovoschiz

This is probably a rare case where amenity=* + disused=yes is appropriate rather than then the use of a lifecycle prefix. To a certain extent it depends on what use-cases might be anticipated: is the presence of an aerial cableway important for routing, or is it a significant landmark? This is always an issue when a tag relates to two concepts: in this case a transport facility and a physical structure. Also would the casual passer-by be aware that it was disused. If the cable and cabins are still visible (depending on whether the cabins are detachable) then it is perfectly possible to not be aware that it is not in service.

Disused lifecycle tagging does cover a range of scenarios: for instance with cableway it might cover any of the following scenarios:

  • The cableway has reached the end of its service life and is not being maintained prior to planned demolition.
  • The cableway is out-of-service because of financial problems with it's operator (this scenario affected me when I planned to use the Lungern-Turren-Bahn in 2001 : the operator has just gone bankrupt).
  • The cableway is out-of-service because it has failed safety tests, but it is anticipated that it will be restored. (Or, perhaps, as in a recent case at Squamish, the cableway was vandalised).
  • No traces of the cableway are obvious anymore (someone set the tag to disused:amenity, but it wasnt updated).

Some infrastructure often exists long after a cableway has been demolished: for instance the top stations at Punta Indren (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/149862631), Furggen (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/129217279), and Fil de Cassons/Cassongrat (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/232100249).

permanent link

answered 23 Sep, 14:31

SK53's gravatar image

SK53 ♦
24.1k46242379
accept rate: 20%

Another option could be just adding disused=yes tag, which is also clear, but does not change rendering - see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused

permanent link

answered 22 Sep, 12:49

kocio's gravatar image

kocio
1.8k11938
accept rate: 17%

2

While adding "disused=yes" can be problematic (for example if an object had two main tags in OSM - which function is now disused?), in a case where something is "still obviously a thing" it might be appropriate - I believe I've used it on canals that are still full of water but no longer have traffic on them, for example.

(22 Sep, 12:56) SomeoneElse ♦

access=no would work in this case, too.

(22 Sep, 20:27) Richard ♦

@Richard While correct on routing, I wonder if access=no + disused=yes would be confusing, as if the gondola vehicles themselves still remain there to be revived in the future. abandoned=yes may be clearer.

(23 Sep, 09:50) Kovoschiz
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×404
×16

question asked: 21 Sep, 16:17

question was seen: 157 times

last updated: 23 Sep, 14:31

powered by OSQA