[Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Dec 16 14:57:04 UTC 2014


2014-12-12 15:15 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com>:
>
> 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
;-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141216/e428fc4b/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list