Yes, benefits are incredibly minor but costs are also low (run a simple bot edit, edit about 30 000 objects) so overall it appears to be worth doing for me.
Also, those tagging were in large part replaced already, see osm tag history (disclaimer: utility=power is used also in other context, not only of power cabinets).
And doing next deprecation here would not be better.
So I want to propose a bot edit that would replace:
power=cable_distribution_cabinet with man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power
man_made=street_cabinet + street_cabinet=power with man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power
with bot run being repeated in future if new cases would appear
TODO:
if reception will be positive invite data consumers listed at Taginfo to comment
obtain community permission to run bot edit and run it via suggestions in iD (also wasting human time of editors using web editor at osm.org and doing it in a sloooow moootiooooon over several years)
do this suggestion as MapRoulette massfix task, pretend it does not count as an automated edit
obtain community permission to run bot edit and run it via MapRoulette massfix task
(some iD and MR changes would be verified and looked at by humans, but vast majority would be blind replacement “because OpenStreetMap told me to do so”)
And overall I would prefer iD to not be in business of such distributed bot edit replacements - if one should be done it can and should be done with a proper discussed bot edit.
We should clean up the street_cabinet wiki article first.
The wording concerning the deprecation of the street_cabinet= values is horrible and suggest we only have a proposal and may suggest you could use other combinations.
And i think the josm presets still use street_cabinet=power for example. So you may clean up now but the ingestion of new objects with the old tagging will not stop.
We also have power transformers tagged as street cabinets, so I’m in favour of tagging these as man_made=street_cabinet with utility=power, though we still need the power=* tag to mark them as cable distribution.
A bot edit to replace power=cable_distribution_cabinet with man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power would loose the information that it’s a “cable_distribution_cabinet”.
where we document a “Kiosk Substation Transformer” to be man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power + power=transformer + transformer=distribution.
I also documented the
A low voltage (LV) network pillar is a network connection point used in areas where the electricity supply via underground cables. The pillar marks the interface between the distribution network and the customer connection.
Up until now I couldn’t find a suitable tag for these beyond man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power. They are power street cabinets, but lacking a tag to say what role they play in the power network.
However from this thread I discovered power=cable_distribution_cabinet which seems like the perfect tag for the low voltage network pillars, so I disagree with deprecating this tag, and I disagree with an automated edit to replace the tag with a street cabinet.
man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power is good to be able to say there is a street cabinet which is part of the power network, but it needs a power=* tag to indicate what role the cabinet plays in the overall power network.
I think it’s safer to only add the tags man_made=street_cabinet + utility=power, and then subsequent we can determine the best path forward for power=cable_distribution_cabinet.
My point still stands that there are different types of power cabinets which serve different roles in the power network, and the power=* tagging is orthogonal to street_cabinet
Personally I have disagreed with replacing all street_cabinet= with utility= , as they can have different meanings. For =power , The former is cabinets containing electrical equipment, which can be backup powers for other utilities and activities (eg traffic signal), once discussed with Australia. The latter is the purpose as electrical utility activities, which may include communications, gas, water, and water outfalls for electricity generation.
On the other hand, street_cabinet= can be argued as failing to distinguish either. So an alternative have to be sought for the former.
I can propose a patch for this one after the fosdem next week.
I get your point and we can find even better value than cable_distribution_cabinet for various reasons:
cabinet would be redundant with man_made=street_cabinet
cable is a bit restrictive as several different functions exists: customer connection to the public grid, fuse boxes, terminations and ensure two different grids remain normally unconnected
We currently miss accurate power=* values for those different cabinets or functions. It’s ok to seek for them but as existing power=cable_distribution_cabinet mixes substations, standalone transformers, various distribution cabinets, it’s not so relevant to keep them. It would need individual review to refine the tagging and accurately classify remaining item. This review will still be possible with utility=power in the future.
I’m not able to articulate it properly, but I think the (2025?) revisions to man_made=street_cabinet, utility=*, and putting transformers in street cabinets was unwieldy. In particular, there are now two primary tags involved: man_made=* and power=* and an important piece of equipment is nominally reduced to the same category as a junction box.
What if a water company has its own (not belonging to the power company) electrical cabinet at an installation?
I think having both man_made=street_cabinet and for example power=transformer is good, they are orthogonal to each other.
A mapper might come along, and not know much about the utility networks, but they do recognise some kind of street cabinet, so they can map it as man_made=street_cabinet, another mapper comes along as knows it’s related to the power network so they add utility=power, then another mapper comes along with more knowledge of the power network and tags it as power=transformer.
Some things in the power network aren’t in a street cabinet (it could be building=service if housed in a building), so won’t have man_made=street_cabinet others will.
man_made=street_cabinet indicates the physical form (or housing, eg. the transformed is housed in a street cabinet, or housed in a building, or attached to a power pole) of the piece of equipment or device, and power=* indicates what the device is and the role it plays within the power network.
man_made=street_cabinet + utility=water (since it’s part of the water utility) + power=* or whatever other tag is needed to tag what function it provides.
Note: given there is active discussion on possibly undeprecating at least part of such tagging and it goes over my head a bit, for now I am definitely not planning on running this edit.
To people thinking that at least some of this tags make sense: can you discuss undeprecating them and update wiki documentation if people are not opposed to it?
(note that some people sadly do not really follow bot editing rules and sooner or later someone will mass-replace without asking just because wiki page claims deprecation - and reverting that may be annoying or it may be not noticed at all)
Count me confused. Are you trying to model a simple uninterrupted power supply unit?I would assume, and Wiki agrees, that power=generator is to be used primarily for units that provide supply to grid:
generator:source=battery is being used for individual/collection of battery packs connected to a local or national grid. Battery storage is sometimes used by facilities that have high peak demands (e.g. electric vehicle charging hubs)
…not for local supply of electronic devices such as traffic lights. I’d regard this as a form of trolltag, of the “paddling pool” kind.
Grid supply is only the most prominent case. =generator itself doesn’t have this as an exhaustive definition. Would you disagree with drawing =generator for backup_generator= and electricity=generator ? Many generator:method=photovoltaics may not feed back into the grid either.
If we continue down that slippery slope, every battery-powered device would contain a generator, and that’s not what they are called. While OSM tag values do not necessarily match real-world denotations, such extension would be stretching it too far for my taste.
No one is arguing to draw “every battery-powered device”, especially if it’s internal. Would you agree to draw them when it’s a fuel cell, but not for battery?