Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
> does it serve food? does it serve alcohol? how fast is food available after ordering? is it table service with waiters? is it counter service with tables? is takeout available? is there drive thru takeout? is there a restroom amenity? is there a playground amenity? This schema is quite meaningfull, but can we actually use these keys? Most of them are verifable, so lets map them? Actually takeout is not limited to ff/rest, but also pubs etc. 2014-12-24 14:08 GMT+04:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > While all restaurants pre-cook some food, > fast food restaurants often cook the majority of food prior to > a customer order. > > But there's just simply no firm line between restaurant and fast food. > But there are lots of attributes: > > does it serve food? > does it serve alcohol? > how fast is food available after ordering? > is it table service with waiters? > is it counter service with tables? > is takeout available? > is there drive thru takeout? > is there a restroom amenity? > is there a playground amenity? > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
While all restaurants pre-cook some food, fast food restaurants often cook the majority of food prior to a customer order. But there's just simply no firm line between restaurant and fast food. But there are lots of attributes: does it serve food? does it serve alcohol? how fast is food available after ordering? is it table service with waiters? is it counter service with tables? is takeout available? is there drive thru takeout? is there a restroom amenity? is there a playground amenity? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
2014-12-12 15:15 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski : > > they also classify it as > casual/not-casual. > > What do folks think of this as an alternative classification? > not sure about this. Around here you can come dressed as you like to any kind of restaurant, or is this casual/not-casual referring to the waiters and staff? Or the availability/complexity of table cloth, napkins etc.? Or to the eating manners? I am not saying that this destinction might not work in some settings/contexts, but fast_food vs. restaurant seems way more useful and easier to decide where I map. Additionally where I find it useful I am adding the tag "restaurant:type:it" to all kind of places where you can find something to eat (even bars and cafes etc.) and add a list of semicolon separated autodeclarations (buzzwords the business has on its signage besides the name) of the place (in the local language) as values: http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/restaurant%3Atype%3Ait I believe this is usefull as there are no English words to catch the fine nuances of the original words. cheers, Martin btw: regarding the McDonald's places I have seen I think there is no doubt that these don't belong into the restaurant category of OSM. I would be more inclined to tag them as leisure=playground than as amenity=restaurant ;-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Folks, Reading this threat, I think I agree with problems brought up around amenity=fast_food It's very subjective, and if you actually look at the DB, you see that many times, people are mis-labeling fast food establishments as restaurants. I see this with McDonalds, and Burger King, specifically. The NYC government classifies restaurants differently. They have the cuisine of the restaurant, but then they also classify it as casual/not-casual. What do folks think of this as an alternative classification? - Serge On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Fri Dec 12 2014 04:49:56 GMT+ (GMT), John F. Eldredge wrote: >> I would not be surprised to find some establishments where the emphasis is >> on food up through mid-evening, but the kitchen closes earlier than the bar >> does, leaving the final hours of operation to offer only beverages and >> perhaps some precooked snack food. >> >> -- > Many foodie pubs in the UK operate in this way. > > Phil (trigpoint ) > > -- > Sent from my Jolla > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Fri Dec 12 2014 04:49:56 GMT+ (GMT), John F. Eldredge wrote: > I would not be surprised to find some establishments where the emphasis is on > food up through mid-evening, but the kitchen closes earlier than the bar > does, leaving the final hours of operation to offer only beverages and > perhaps some precooked snack food. > > -- Many foodie pubs in the UK operate in this way. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
(Belgium) It all depends on licenses. You need a special license to sell alcoholic-drinks without food. The "traditional" restaurants are only allowed to sell drinks with food. In case they also sells drinks without meals they are often called Cafe-Restaurant or Restaurant-Taverne. The latter sounds "better" than just Taverne. Or maybe there is an actual difference that I'm not aware of. m On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:49 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > I would not be surprised to find some establishments where the emphasis is > on food up through mid-evening, but the kitchen closes earlier than the bar > does, leaving the final hours of operation to offer only beverages and > perhaps some precooked snack food. > > > On December 11, 2014 6:15:17 AM CST, Andreas Goss > wrote: >> >> Restaurants only serve meals, it is not possible to go there and only >>> have a drink. >>> >> >> That really depends on the restaurant. A at least in Bavaria there are a >> lot of traditional restaurants where you can just get a beer. Also very >> common when they are next to sports clubs. >> __ >> openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 >> wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 >> >> >> -- >> >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > -- > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther > King, Jr. > > -- > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther > King, Jr. > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
I would not be surprised to find some establishments where the emphasis is on food up through mid-evening, but the kitchen closes earlier than the bar does, leaving the final hours of operation to offer only beverages and perhaps some precooked snack food. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On December 11, 2014 6:15:17 AM CST, Andreas Goss wrote: > > Restaurants only serve meals, it is not possible to go there and > only > > have a drink. > > That really depends on the restaurant. A at least in Bavaria there are > a > lot of traditional restaurants where you can just get a beer. Also > very > common when they are next to sports clubs. > __ > openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 > wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On December 11, 2014 6:15:17 AM CST, Andreas Goss wrote: > > Restaurants only serve meals, it is not possible to go there and > only > > have a drink. > > That really depends on the restaurant. A at least in Bavaria there are > a > lot of traditional restaurants where you can just get a beer. Also > very > common when they are next to sports clubs. > __ > openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 > wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Restaurants only serve meals, it is not possible to go there and only have a drink. That really depends on the restaurant. A at least in Bavaria there are a lot of traditional restaurants where you can just get a beer. Also very common when they are next to sports clubs. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
I struggle with this issue as well. In Belgium we have a lot of "tavernes" (taverns) or "brasseries" (similar, but the word is translated from French in this case). The are very restaurant like, seated-service, quality food. Taverns also serve ice creams, sweet pancakes etc outside lunch hours. Furthermore, they also only serve drinks, unlike restaurants. They are really places where families goes on a Sunday afternoon, since they often have a playground for children as well (at least in the countryside). Restaurants only serve meals, it is not possible to go there and only have a drink. Should we tag the taverns with amenity=pub, food=yes or restaurant ? Then you also have "cafés", as in french meaning of the word. They have to be tagged as pubs. (confusing for a non-English mapper:-) ) They only serve drinks and no food. (typically) On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Richard Welty writes: > > > the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service. even > > so, there are occasional grey areas (e.g., at Hardees you order at > > the counter but they deliver to your table, still fast food in my book.) > > > > and it produces slightly quirky results, for example the most excellent > > deli Gershon's in Schenectady has table service but the most excellent > > deli Maurice's in Albany has counter service. they are otherwise very > > similar restaurants. it kind of makes you wish we didn't have fast_food > > and instead had detailed tags, as another suggested. > > (am way behind on my mail, and picked a semi-random note to reply to) > > As I see it, there are a few issues brought out by this discussion. My > $0.02: > > what people think "restaurant" means in English is not really relevant > to fast_food vs restaurant. Just because McDonald's meets wikipedia's > definition of restaurant does not make amenity=restaurant appropriate > - OSM has specific guidelines to split places that sell food into > multiple tags. > > Fundamentally, fast_food is a quality/value judgement. It implies a > degree of industrialization in the process. Ordering at a counter and > having it handed to you **more quickly than it should have taken to > prepare it** is a huge clue. > > amenity=restaurant implies that you sit at a table, order from > waitstaff, and have food delivered, always. This is fairly easy. > > amenity=cafe is a place where it isn't as formal as restaurant, but it > has actual food, and typically one will order at a counter and either > you get called to pick it up later, or it will be delivered, often to > your table identified by some number that you were handed when you > ordered. "actual food" is key here, and yes that's a value judgement > at the boundary. > > In Richard's example, I would put a nice deli with counter service as > cafe. That's not a dig, it's saying that it doesn't have seated > service. I expect high-quality food from something tagged amenity=cafe. > > Note that amenity=restaurant does not imply high-end food. It only > implies more or less that there is seated service and almost but not > quite implies that food is prepared (final steps anyway) to order, not > ahead of time on speculation that someone will appear. > > The really hard line is cafe vs fast_food. The true test is whether > people who appreciate food quality are willing to go (cafe) other than > under circumstances when they feel they really have to save time > (fast_food). There is no exact objective test for this difference. But > if it's a chain, or if foodie types look down on it, it's likely > fast_food. If it's a one-off and people think the food is good, it's > cafe. I realize that doesn't fit the OSM objectively-verifiable notion, > but that's how the world really is. > > The real issue is that what people who use maps want to know is whether > a place has decent food or factory food. That's IMHO why the cafe vs > fast_food distinction exists. > > Another way to look at the issue is that local mappers should decide. > I've been tagging places as fast_food, cafe and restaurant. I'm not > aware of anyone changing my tags or messaging me about the choice. So I > don't see much actual dispute. > > > > For me, the only difficult call has been Starbucks, which I couldn't > remember but I looked and I did call it cafe, vs an indie coffeeshop, > which I definitely would put as cafe. Dunkin Donuts is fast_food, as is > Chipotle, Qdoba and Subway. A one-off breakfast place that isn't super > nice (typical 0530 opening omelette shop) I still put as restaurant > because you are seated and have waitstaff. > > Aside from Starbucks this has been easy. If someone challenged me that > Starbuck's should be fast food because it's really hard to objectively > tell from Dunkin Donuts I would probably concede quickly. Maybe I'll > change the one I tagged after this note anyway :-) Other things I would > need to hear a persuasive argument why I was wrong
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Richard Welty writes: > the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service. even > so, there are occasional grey areas (e.g., at Hardees you order at > the counter but they deliver to your table, still fast food in my book.) > > and it produces slightly quirky results, for example the most excellent > deli Gershon's in Schenectady has table service but the most excellent > deli Maurice's in Albany has counter service. they are otherwise very > similar restaurants. it kind of makes you wish we didn't have fast_food > and instead had detailed tags, as another suggested. (am way behind on my mail, and picked a semi-random note to reply to) As I see it, there are a few issues brought out by this discussion. My $0.02: what people think "restaurant" means in English is not really relevant to fast_food vs restaurant. Just because McDonald's meets wikipedia's definition of restaurant does not make amenity=restaurant appropriate - OSM has specific guidelines to split places that sell food into multiple tags. Fundamentally, fast_food is a quality/value judgement. It implies a degree of industrialization in the process. Ordering at a counter and having it handed to you **more quickly than it should have taken to prepare it** is a huge clue. amenity=restaurant implies that you sit at a table, order from waitstaff, and have food delivered, always. This is fairly easy. amenity=cafe is a place where it isn't as formal as restaurant, but it has actual food, and typically one will order at a counter and either you get called to pick it up later, or it will be delivered, often to your table identified by some number that you were handed when you ordered. "actual food" is key here, and yes that's a value judgement at the boundary. In Richard's example, I would put a nice deli with counter service as cafe. That's not a dig, it's saying that it doesn't have seated service. I expect high-quality food from something tagged amenity=cafe. Note that amenity=restaurant does not imply high-end food. It only implies more or less that there is seated service and almost but not quite implies that food is prepared (final steps anyway) to order, not ahead of time on speculation that someone will appear. The really hard line is cafe vs fast_food. The true test is whether people who appreciate food quality are willing to go (cafe) other than under circumstances when they feel they really have to save time (fast_food). There is no exact objective test for this difference. But if it's a chain, or if foodie types look down on it, it's likely fast_food. If it's a one-off and people think the food is good, it's cafe. I realize that doesn't fit the OSM objectively-verifiable notion, but that's how the world really is. The real issue is that what people who use maps want to know is whether a place has decent food or factory food. That's IMHO why the cafe vs fast_food distinction exists. Another way to look at the issue is that local mappers should decide. I've been tagging places as fast_food, cafe and restaurant. I'm not aware of anyone changing my tags or messaging me about the choice. So I don't see much actual dispute. For me, the only difficult call has been Starbucks, which I couldn't remember but I looked and I did call it cafe, vs an indie coffeeshop, which I definitely would put as cafe. Dunkin Donuts is fast_food, as is Chipotle, Qdoba and Subway. A one-off breakfast place that isn't super nice (typical 0530 opening omelette shop) I still put as restaurant because you are seated and have waitstaff. Aside from Starbucks this has been easy. If someone challenged me that Starbuck's should be fast food because it's really hard to objectively tell from Dunkin Donuts I would probably concede quickly. Maybe I'll change the one I tagged after this note anyway :-) Other things I would need to hear a persuasive argument why I was wrong. pgp4jDOyWGIDZ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
fast_food vs. restaurant, ah yes, a debate for the ages. :-) I used the counter service versus table service distinction for a while, then another mapper from our local group suggested that a distinction with fewer exceptions is: pay before eating (fast_food) vs. pay after eating (restaurant). It isn't a perfect match, but it works pretty well here. If I'm really having a hard time selecting the perfect tag from equally good candidates, I'll check what other local mappers have used and follow their guidance. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Janko Mihelić writes: > > > > > If you ask me, all fast foods are restaurants, restaurant is just a broader term.There's no way we can find a clear line that distinct fast food with slow food restaurants. What ever rule you find, there will be some example of a restaurant that fits both descriptions. There is probably a restaurant somewhere in the world where you buy food from a counter, but the food is expensive and very good. Also, there is a restaurant with waiters, that only serves hamburgers. Not to say bars and cafes can also be restaurants and fast foods. > The best we can do is use other tags, like cuisine=*, diet=*, and maybe invent some new ones like waiters=yes/no, buffet=yes/no, conveyor_belt_sushi=yes, grill=yes/charcoal/flattop etc. > Janko > > > > 2014-08-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes : > > On Sat, 2014-08-02 at 21:29 -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 01:45 +0200, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > > > Sometimes it's hard for me to tell whether a food venue should be > > > classified as a restaurant or a fast food. > > > From the description in the Wiki, the distinguishing features are: > > > * payment right away > > > * counter-only service (no waiters) > > > * disposable plates and utensils > > > * usually offers take-away > > > * very fast (I guess this means in most cases you wait at the counter > > > for your order to be fulfilled) > > > > > > These usually get tagged as fast_food. Should they be? Sometimes food > > > venues beg to be called a fast food (and someone tags them so) due to > > > quality, but then again, they're not so fast - so maybe there should > > > be amenity=shitty_food? :P Jokes aside, it's all subjective (hence, > > > fails at verifiability). > > > > > > You might try referring to: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_restaurant > > > > which also mentions another classification, "fast casual" which is > > basically a step up from "fast food" but not quite as fancy as a > > (casual) full-service restaurant. When talking about tagging we could ponder a while on the possibility to use a extremly general tag, amenity=place_to_eat_and_drink, this will make the initial choice easy. Of course the discussion will be there still for the detailing of the subordinate tags, this time with an even wider set of meanings (as even vending machines would fit). The meaning of the term "restaurant" is sometimes a general term for places to eat and drink in more ordered forms, as Janko writes (not sure if that's the case in british english though). We could use that value (or any like it) as the general term and then use a scheme of subtags to tag the specifics. One possibility for this scheme is as Janko writes to use a full set of tags, much like a form that you fill in. To make it easier we could have one special tag that is used (as a short cut) to fill in these forms with a predefined set of values. E.g restaurant=fine_dining, restaurant=fast_food, it will be obvious that only some of the tags in the form can be filled this way. So I believe that we need to ask ourselves, how far down in the hierarchy do we want to go with the values of the amenity-key in this case. I think that as long as there are a fairly known term to use it fits as a value to the key amenity=*, as we have pub/cafe/biergarten/bar/food_court. In that tradition it is quite clear that Restaurant is one of those terms. fast_food_restaurant is quite easy to understand too. I see these values only as fast ways to do mapping (and that further detailing could be done afterwards). A problem with the fast tagging method is that we lack a value for the unclear cases (a catch-them-all value to use when uncertain ) and then we have to decide if something that apparently is neither/both should be tagged with one or the other terms. ((My own conclusion of what I wrote is that I will use amenity=restaurant when in doubt, even if I don't experience it as a restaurant myself)) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On 2014-08-04 05:52, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 13:19 -0700, Tod Fitch wrote: Thinking about this there seems to be several items that distinguish a fast food restaurant from other restaurants in my mind: 1. Does it have a drive-through window? Yes implies fast food. 1. Are the plates and cutlery are disposable? Yes implies fast food. Agree with both of these for the most part. 2. Does the establishment has a license to sell alcoholic beverages? No implies fast food. However, yes does not imply "not fast food" either, as it would disqualify Chipotle and Taco Cabana, both of which serve margaritas, and the latter at least has bottled beer too. "No alcohol" does not imply fast_food at many "middle eastern" restaurants either, nor at restaurants with a "bring your own wine" compromise policy either. I don't think alcohol has anything at all to do with the distinction between restaurant and fast_food. --colin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 13:19 -0700, Tod Fitch wrote: > Thinking about this there seems to be several items that distinguish a > fast food restaurant from other restaurants in my mind: > 1. Does it have a drive-through window? Yes implies fast food. > 1. Are the plates and cutlery are disposable? Yes implies fast food. Agree with both of these for the most part. > 2. Does the establishment has a license to sell alcoholic beverages? > No implies fast food. However, yes does not imply "not fast food" either, as it would disqualify Chipotle and Taco Cabana, both of which serve margaritas, and the latter at least has bottled beer too. -- Shawn K. Quinn ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 10:43 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: > the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service. even > so, there are occasional grey areas (e.g., at Hardees you order at > the counter but they deliver to your table, still fast food in my > book.) Whataburger is like this as well, and they definitely would be fast food as they also have a drive-thru. > and it produces slightly quirky results, for example the most > excellent deli Gershon's in Schenectady has table service but the most > excellent deli Maurice's in Albany has counter service. they are > otherwise very similar restaurants. it kind of makes you wish we > didn't have fast_food and instead had detailed tags, as another > suggested. +1. I think this tagging system needs to be reworked. At minimum amenity=restaurant being as restricted as it is to table service causes more problems than it might solve. -- Shawn K. Quinn ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Il giorno 03/ago/2014, alle ore 22:19, Tod Fitch ha scritto: >> amenity=restaurant >> restaurant_type=fast_food >> cuisine=pizza > +1 on this, though I might go for restaurant:type=fast_food rather than > restaurant_type=fast_food. The current definition in our wiki is: amenity=restaurant is for a generally formal place with sit-down facilities selling full meals served by waiters and often licensed (where allowed) to sell alcoholic drinks. This is less broad than the Wikipedia definition and excludes most fast food places. We re already using restaurant:type (localized :it) for multivalue lists of restaurant types, eg. osteria or ristorante;pizzeria;steak_house or bar;tavola_calda. Etc. (according to the self-declaration of the business). https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/restaurant%3Atype%3Ait#values fast food hardly fits into this existing scheme. I don't believe the osm scheme is the only possible, and it is surely possible to add more detailed tags, but we shouldn't redefine the principal established tags (at most you could try to establish an alternative and deprecate the current tags). FWIW, in Italy we are using 2 types of tags for pizza, amenity=fast_food (pizza al taglio / slices) and amenity=restaurant (pizzeria) Both with cuisine=pizza There is also oven=wood_fired as attribute: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/oven=wood_fired#overview Cheers, Martin___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
> Il giorno 03/ago/2014, alle ore 21:34, Andy Mabbett > ha scritto: > > We should probably tag something like: > >amenity=restaurant >restaurant_type=fast_food >cuisine=pizza There are also lots of amenity=fast food that aren't restaurants by the WP definition. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
> Il giorno 03/ago/2014, alle ore 21:34, Andy Mabbett > ha scritto: > > Your comment suggests that "fast food" and "restaurant" are mutually > exclusive; they are not. They are in openstreetmap ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On 8/3/14 4:19 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > On Aug 3, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> Your comment suggests that "fast food" and "restaurant" are mutually >> exclusive; they are not. >> >> Google finds "about 5,110,000 results" for "fast food restaurant", >> with quotes; the first of which is the Wikipedia article: >> >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_restaurant >> >> We should probably tag something like: >> >>amenity=restaurant >>restaurant_type=fast_food >>cuisine=pizza >> > +1 on this, though I might go for restaurant:type=fast_food rather than > restaurant_type=fast_food. > > The phrase "I know it when I see it" comes to mind. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it still doesn't address the problem of fast food properly. restaurant:service=counter|table focuses on something that objectively verifiable, much better than "i know it when i see it." > > 2. Does the establishment has a license to sell alcoholic beverages? No > implies fast food. not true for european fast food franchises that sell beer. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On 8/3/14 12:52 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On 3 August 2014 15:43, Richard Welty wrote: >> the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service > Citation? it's been discussed extensively in the past and that was where the discussion settled. sorry no direct citation other than the mailing list archives. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Aug 3, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > Your comment suggests that "fast food" and "restaurant" are mutually > exclusive; they are not. > > Google finds "about 5,110,000 results" for "fast food restaurant", > with quotes; the first of which is the Wikipedia article: > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_restaurant > > We should probably tag something like: > >amenity=restaurant >restaurant_type=fast_food >cuisine=pizza > +1 on this, though I might go for restaurant:type=fast_food rather than restaurant_type=fast_food. The phrase "I know it when I see it" comes to mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it We have two local places where you order at a counter, and later, pick up your order from another counter. One I consider a restaurant the other I consider a fast food place. Both happen to have the same non-burger cuisine. Some of it is the atmosphere they present. And I am sure that my categorization may not suit another mapper. Thinking about this there seems to be several items that distinguish a fast food restaurant from other restaurants in my mind: 1. Does it have a drive-through window? Yes implies fast food. 1. Are the plates and cutlery are disposable? Yes implies fast food. 2. Does the establishment has a license to sell alcoholic beverages? No implies fast food. But there are other much more subjective criteria that people use that would be more difficult to unify into a straight forward decision tree. Since it is, in my mind, difficult to create an objective description of the difference between a fast food establishment and other food serving establishments, simply tagging amenity=restaurant with a subtype to describe the service type makes sense to me. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On 3 August 2014 17:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Il giorno 03/ago/2014, alle ore 17:15, Andy Mabbett >> ha scritto: >> >> My dictionary defines a restaurant as "A place where people pay to sit >> and eat meals that are cooked and served on the premises." All of >> that can be done at a McDonalds. > > > that definition would fit on any fast_food with seating possibility, so it > likely isn't suitable to distinguish a fast food from an amenity=restaurant Your comment suggests that "fast food" and "restaurant" are mutually exclusive; they are not. Google finds "about 5,110,000 results" for "fast food restaurant", with quotes; the first of which is the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_restaurant We should probably tag something like: amenity=restaurant restaurant_type=fast_food cuisine=pizza -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On 3 August 2014 15:43, Richard Welty wrote: > the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service Citation? Anecdotally, my first (Saturday) job was behind the counter of a counter-service restaurant that served game pie, smoked salmon, and the like, to discerning guests, in a high-end department store. That was shortly after I ate my first burger, in a "Wimpy" establishment that had table service. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
> Il giorno 03/ago/2014, alle ore 17:15, Andy Mabbett > ha scritto: > > My dictionary defines a restaurant as "A place where people pay to sit > and eat meals that are cooked and served on the premises." All of > that can be done at a McDonalds. that definition would fit on any fast_food with seating possibility, so it likely isn't suitable to distinguish a fast food from an amenity=restaurant cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
"On 3 August 2014 14:19, Philip Barnes wrote: > I would tend to go for fast_food for dominos, they are primarily take > aways but may offer somewhere to sit but that does not make it a > restaurant. I would go for restaurant for most Pizza Huts. That appears to be a value judgement, and not something that couldn't easily be measured on the ground. > To add to the confusion, McDonalds do use the word > restaurant on their fast_food outlets when they are in > no way restaurants. My dictionary defines a restaurant as "A place where people pay to sit and eat meals that are cooked and served on the premises." All of that can be done at a McDonalds. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
the common rule of thumb is counter service vs. table service. even so, there are occasional grey areas (e.g., at Hardees you order at the counter but they deliver to your table, still fast food in my book.) and it produces slightly quirky results, for example the most excellent deli Gershon's in Schenectady has table service but the most excellent deli Maurice's in Albany has counter service. they are otherwise very similar restaurants. it kind of makes you wish we didn't have fast_food and instead had detailed tags, as another suggested. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
If you ask me, all fast foods are restaurants, restaurant is just a broader term. There's no way we can find a clear line that distinct fast food with slow food restaurants. What ever rule you find, there will be some example of a restaurant that fits both descriptions. There is probably a restaurant somewhere in the world where you buy food from a counter, but the food is expensive and very good. Also, there is a restaurant with waiters, that only serves hamburgers. Not to say bars and cafes can also be restaurants and fast foods. The best we can do is use other tags, like cuisine=*, diet=*, and maybe invent some new ones like waiters=yes/no, buffet=yes/no, conveyor_belt_sushi=yes, grill=yes/charcoal/flattop etc. Janko 2014-08-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes : > On Sat, 2014-08-02 at 21:29 -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 01:45 +0200, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > > > Sometimes it's hard for me to tell whether a food venue should be > > > classified as a restaurant or a fast food. > > > From the description in the Wiki, the distinguishing features are: > > > * payment right away > > > * counter-only service (no waiters) > > > * disposable plates and utensils > > > * usually offers take-away > > > * very fast (I guess this means in most cases you wait at the counter > > > for your order to be fulfilled) > > > > > > Having listed that, a few problematic cases from my experience in > Poland: > > > > > > GreenWay, BioWay and the likes > > > * vegetarian food > > > * no waiters, you order at the counter, wait at your table and take > > > your meal from the counter when it's ready > > > * non-disposable utensils > > > > I'd lean toward calling this type of place (and tagging it as) fast > > food. > > > > > Various pizza venues, be it a part of bigger chain or one-off > > > * offers pizza, maybe other Italian dishes, salad, fries, > > > * no waiters, as above > > > * telephone delivery > > > * non-disposable utensils etc when you eat at the venue > > > Basically similar to eg. Domino's. > > > > For these pizza venues, I would tag them similar to how Domino's is > > tagged in the US/Canada. The Domino's nearest me is amenity=restaurant > > cuisine=pizza though in fairness the menu has expanded greatly beyond > > simply pizza. > > > I would tend to go for fast_food for dominos, they are primarily take > aways but may offer somewhere to sit but that does not make it a > restaurant. I would go for restaurant for most Pizza Huts. Although > Pizza Hut do offer take aways from their restaurants, they do have > waiter service. amenity=restaurant take_away=yes? Pizza Hut do also have > delivery locations where you can order a pizza for collection, these > locations I would go for fast_food. > > To add to the confusion, McDonalds do use the word restaurant on their > fast_food outlets when they are in no way restaurants. > > > > These usually get tagged as fast_food. Should they be? Sometimes food > > > venues beg to be called a fast food (and someone tags them so) due to > > > quality, but then again, they're not so fast - so maybe there should > > > be amenity=shitty_food? :P Jokes aside, it's all subjective (hence, > > > fails at verifiability). > > > > As bad as the food may be somewhere, in all seriousness, tags should > > definitely not contain profanity. Even the G-rated amenity=crummy_food > > or similar wouldn't be helpful. > > > > You might try referring to: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_restaurant > > > > which also mentions another classification, "fast casual" which is > > basically a step up from "fast food" but not quite as fancy as a > > (casual) full-service restaurant. Chipotle is mentioned as an example of > > fast casual and a randomly selected one in my area is simply tagged as > > amenity=fast_food cuisine=mexican. > > > > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Sat, 2014-08-02 at 21:29 -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 01:45 +0200, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > > Sometimes it's hard for me to tell whether a food venue should be > > classified as a restaurant or a fast food. > > From the description in the Wiki, the distinguishing features are: > > * payment right away > > * counter-only service (no waiters) > > * disposable plates and utensils > > * usually offers take-away > > * very fast (I guess this means in most cases you wait at the counter > > for your order to be fulfilled) > > > > Having listed that, a few problematic cases from my experience in Poland: > > > > GreenWay, BioWay and the likes > > * vegetarian food > > * no waiters, you order at the counter, wait at your table and take > > your meal from the counter when it's ready > > * non-disposable utensils > > I'd lean toward calling this type of place (and tagging it as) fast > food. > > > Various pizza venues, be it a part of bigger chain or one-off > > * offers pizza, maybe other Italian dishes, salad, fries, > > * no waiters, as above > > * telephone delivery > > * non-disposable utensils etc when you eat at the venue > > Basically similar to eg. Domino's. > > For these pizza venues, I would tag them similar to how Domino's is > tagged in the US/Canada. The Domino's nearest me is amenity=restaurant > cuisine=pizza though in fairness the menu has expanded greatly beyond > simply pizza. > I would tend to go for fast_food for dominos, they are primarily take aways but may offer somewhere to sit but that does not make it a restaurant. I would go for restaurant for most Pizza Huts. Although Pizza Hut do offer take aways from their restaurants, they do have waiter service. amenity=restaurant take_away=yes? Pizza Hut do also have delivery locations where you can order a pizza for collection, these locations I would go for fast_food. To add to the confusion, McDonalds do use the word restaurant on their fast_food outlets when they are in no way restaurants. > > These usually get tagged as fast_food. Should they be? Sometimes food > > venues beg to be called a fast food (and someone tags them so) due to > > quality, but then again, they're not so fast - so maybe there should > > be amenity=shitty_food? :P Jokes aside, it's all subjective (hence, > > fails at verifiability). > > As bad as the food may be somewhere, in all seriousness, tags should > definitely not contain profanity. Even the G-rated amenity=crummy_food > or similar wouldn't be helpful. > > You might try referring to: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_restaurant > > which also mentions another classification, "fast casual" which is > basically a step up from "fast food" but not quite as fancy as a > (casual) full-service restaurant. Chipotle is mentioned as an example of > fast casual and a randomly selected one in my area is simply tagged as > amenity=fast_food cuisine=mexican. > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 01:45 +0200, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > Sometimes it's hard for me to tell whether a food venue should be > classified as a restaurant or a fast food. > From the description in the Wiki, the distinguishing features are: > * payment right away > * counter-only service (no waiters) > * disposable plates and utensils > * usually offers take-away > * very fast (I guess this means in most cases you wait at the counter > for your order to be fulfilled) > > Having listed that, a few problematic cases from my experience in Poland: > > GreenWay, BioWay and the likes > * vegetarian food > * no waiters, you order at the counter, wait at your table and take > your meal from the counter when it's ready > * non-disposable utensils I'd lean toward calling this type of place (and tagging it as) fast food. > Various pizza venues, be it a part of bigger chain or one-off > * offers pizza, maybe other Italian dishes, salad, fries, > * no waiters, as above > * telephone delivery > * non-disposable utensils etc when you eat at the venue > Basically similar to eg. Domino's. For these pizza venues, I would tag them similar to how Domino's is tagged in the US/Canada. The Domino's nearest me is amenity=restaurant cuisine=pizza though in fairness the menu has expanded greatly beyond simply pizza. > These usually get tagged as fast_food. Should they be? Sometimes food > venues beg to be called a fast food (and someone tags them so) due to > quality, but then again, they're not so fast - so maybe there should > be amenity=shitty_food? :P Jokes aside, it's all subjective (hence, > fails at verifiability). As bad as the food may be somewhere, in all seriousness, tags should definitely not contain profanity. Even the G-rated amenity=crummy_food or similar wouldn't be helpful. You might try referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_restaurant which also mentions another classification, "fast casual" which is basically a step up from "fast food" but not quite as fancy as a (casual) full-service restaurant. Chipotle is mentioned as an example of fast casual and a randomly selected one in my area is simply tagged as amenity=fast_food cuisine=mexican. -- Shawn K. Quinn ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food
Sometimes it's hard for me to tell whether a food venue should be classified as a restaurant or a fast food. From the description in the Wiki, the distinguishing features are: * payment right away * counter-only service (no waiters) * disposable plates and utensils * usually offers take-away * very fast (I guess this means in most cases you wait at the counter for your order to be fulfilled) Having listed that, a few problematic cases from my experience in Poland: GreenWay, BioWay and the likes * vegetarian food * no waiters, you order at the counter, wait at your table and take your meal from the counter when it's ready * non-disposable utensils Various pizza venues, be it a part of bigger chain or one-off * offers pizza, maybe other Italian dishes, salad, fries, * no waiters, as above * telephone delivery * non-disposable utensils etc when you eat at the venue Basically similar to eg. Domino's. These usually get tagged as fast_food. Should they be? Sometimes food venues beg to be called a fast food (and someone tags them so) due to quality, but then again, they're not so fast - so maybe there should be amenity=shitty_food? :P Jokes aside, it's all subjective (hence, fails at verifiability). Michał ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
