[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.


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