Deprecated features

This page is about tagging practices that are no longer recommended.
For how to map objects that are themselves deprecated (abandoned, in ruins, etc.) see Lifecycle prefix.

A deprecated tag or deprecated feature is tagging that is recommended by OpenStreetMap community consensus for removal and replacement with other tagging.

Anybody is allowed and encouraged to use any tag they think is useful.

As tagging becomes more fine-grained and sophisticated over time, the community of mappers invent new tagging as needed to describe features in increasing detail. Occasionally, the community finds that extending existing tagging is not sufficient to meet current mapping needs, and instead, determines that an older tagging scheme should be replaced with new tagging that better models the world. In other cases, multiple competing tagging schemes may have arisen in parallel. If one or the other scheme gains sufficient community support over time, a consensus may develop to deprecate the other scheme. Documenting a feature as deprecated allows mappers and developers to understand which of multiple tagging schemes are recommended for use by the community.

Tags are typically discussed within wider community, for example at tagging mailing list in way that allows everybody to contribute. In cases of consensus that tagging in a different way is preferable tag can be considered as deprecated. There are various ways that together result in reduced tag usage and each requires consensus or agreement from relevant people

Tag can be described as unwanted together with reasons for that on OSM Wiki
Validator complaints may be added to JOSM, iD, Osmose and other validators or other Quality assurance tools
- Typically it requires opening issue on bug tracker of a given project
Support may be dropped from presets and rendering of editors
- Typically it requires opening issue on bug tracker of a given project
People may check tag usage in their area and edit objects to improve tagging
Support may be dropped among data consumers
- Typically it requires opening issue on bug tracker of a given project
In rare cases automatic edits can be done to improve tagging. Such edits must follow Automated Edits code of conduct

Examples

There are some clear cases like highway=unsurfaced that has

no support among mappers
usage minimal compared to alternatives
conflicts with widely used tagging schemes for describing roads (because it uses the same key)
no support by editors
no support by data consumers
validators complain about it when this tag is used
Other mappers are likely to complain about using such tag and retag it if encountered

All this is a clear evidence that this tag is deprecated. As result it is described as a deprecated on this wiki.

On the other hand highway=motorway is clearly not deprecated

Massive and ongoing use by mappers
No viable alternatives
No conflict with other serious tagging schemes
Supported by editors
Supported by data consumers
No validator complains about its use
Other mappers are not going to complain about using highway=motorway for marking motorways

As result it is not described as a deprecated on this wiki.

There are also relatively rare cases where mappers disagree whether tag is problematic, should it be used, should it be avoided, should it be replaced, if replaced - them how, and so on.

Benefits and drawbacks

Deprecations may be used to eliminate tags that are confusing, inferior, synonymous and lead to mistakes
Deprecations of tags are confusing for mappers who used them, especially ones who missed deprecation discussion (most mappers never participate in such discussion, they just map)
Deprecations will break and irritate data consumers using deprecated tags
It is common that people treat "tag x is deprecated" or "tag x should be deprecated" or "someone told me that tag x is deprecated" as reason to make undiscussed mass edits violating Automated Edits code of conduct
Often expressed opinion is that in case of two tags with exactly the same meaning deprecating one and retagging objects is waste of time and energy and disturbs mapping for no benefit.
Often expressed opinion is that in such case of tags with the same meaning one should be deprecated
People often disagree which tags are synonymous, which is preferable and whatever deprecation should happen. In some cases discussion whatever deprecation actually happened is also hotly debated.
As result often expressed opinion is that discussions about deprecating is time-consuming affair not worth energy spend on it
At the same time many people are spending a lot of time on planning, proposing, supporting deprecations and making edits at least partially motivated by that

Wiki guidelines

Please also keep the description box in sync:

You may also use Template:Deprecated on the feature page.

In general, tags should be described as deprecated because there is no serious support for them among mappers. Opposite - documenting tags as deprecated on OSM Wiki and demanding mappers to change opinion is unwanted.

Everything is more complicated than expected

Opinion among mappers may differ by region - there is a clear consensus that associatedStreet relations are unwanted in Germany but at the same time mappers in France like it and continue to use this tagging scheme.
In some cases opinions of mappers are not nicely segregated in regions and mappers in the same area has different preferences. This case is most likely to result in conflicts.
Some tags may be supported or preferred in one editor, while other software may encourage to use a competing tagging schemes
In some cases validator complaints are unwanted and should be changed See for example this case where describing some tag combinations as deprecated was reverted. In general for any validator it is sometimes necessary to improve validator, not map data
Some tags with very high usage count are considered as deprecated - for example is_in=* tag family is considered as deprecated by JOSM, and waterway=riverbank was considered as deprecated by iD when it was used over 300 000 times.
Usage count can be influenced by single person or a small group by bot edits or mass editing. Such actions can be widely supported by remaining community or be considered as undesirable, so just tag usage count is not foolproof way of measuring support for tag among mappers
Sometimes opinion among mappers or group of mappers conflicts with opinion among developers of validator or QA tool. Sometimes different groups of mappers request opposing changes to what kind of mapping should be considered as undesirable.
Just describing something as deprecated on the Wiki does not make a tag deprecated
Just describing a deprecated and unwanted tagging as a good idea does not mean it is a good idea
There are rejected proposals with widely used tags, see shop=storage_rental where voting failed twice but now has over 20 000 uses
There are approved proposals for tagging that is working poorly, some tagging from approved proposal got later deprecated
Data consumers may lag behind what is preferred among mappers or present in database, sometimes very significantly. Note also that some projects consider providing useful feedback to mappers as an important goal (for example OSM Carto) while other map projects may have different priorities.
Data consumers may use and promote tags which are unwanted and/or duplicate existing tags
Paid mappers may systematically use novel/weird/incorrect mapping without consulting OSM community, in violation of OEG. This can further distort tag usage statistics.
There are cases of tags deprecated via proposal process that are still in significant use and not considered as deprecated
Judging consensus among mappers is extremely hard, as only tiny minority participates in discussions and sometimes it is hard to distinguish between "single person supports this and likes to argue" from "this person represents many mappers sharing their opinion"
There are cases where tag is considered as deprecated by some software with strong recommendations to retag it, while supported by other software and mappers
- In some cases deprecating and removal of such tag is a good idea, in some cases not
Opinions change over time, tags widely used or disliked or deprecated or approved years ago may currently be considered differently.
Some tags may have substantial presence (or be marked as deprecated) due to bugs in software, especially in presets, it is one more reason to not trust editors blindly
Sometimes new tag is deprecated, not old one. It happens when someone introduces new tag that duplicates already existing one, typically such tags are not gaining enough use to be even documented as deprecated.
Situation on the ground is massively different between various places, in some cases discussion between mappers may be really confused as people are unaware that something may even exist - while such situation is obvious and normal for someone else
There are widely used tagging schemes hated by people using OSM data. Bare highway=path without even a surface=* is a major example, see listing of some issues. See also linked texts in footnotes, some of them are:
- "Right now I am consuming data for a cycling router and highway=path is the bane of my life."
- New road style for the Default map style - highway=path is evil (search for "highway=path, highway=footway problems")
- "Horridly complex tag, everyone uses it differently."
Some mappers dispute validity of proposal process, reject deprecating tags at all, consider OSM Wiki as useless, treat specific editors are utterly broken or consider some (or all) documentation as illegitimate (one or more may apply). This people often have more or less valid reasons for doing this.
Documentation on OSM Wiki, documentation elsewhere, editor presets and advice from other mappers may be outdated, incomplete, wrong, mistaken or otherwise problematic. Neither should be assumed to be foolproof.
This list definitely does not cover entire complexity and is wrong about something. Different people will have mismatching opinions which part is incorrect.