[Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 12:35, bkil <bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay, so at least now I better see where the misunderstanding stems
> from. Let's get some facts straight. It may be true that almost all
> words in OSM are interpreted within British English, but amenity=café
> is an exception (we've decided to leave out the accent for the benefit
> of the international community).
>

It's not clear to me that amenity=cafe is an exception, going by the wiki.
What has happened is that some parts of the world interpret it differently.
Which is not a good thing.

>
> Other than the accidental clash in wording, it doesn't refer to a
> British cafe, greasy spoon or a diner


 But the wiki description matches those things.

B- without having visited one of
> those, I'd probably simply tag those as amenity=fast_food.
>

In many cafes in the UK, the food is NOT fast.  It's not pre-cooked and
going dry under a heat lamp, it is cooked from raw, on demand.

If you refer to:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcafe
>
> > amenity=cafe (café) is for a generally informal place with sit-down
> facilities selling beverages and light meals and/or snacks. This includes
> coffee-shops and tea shops selling perhaps tea, coffee and cakes through to
> bistros selling meals with alcoholic drinks."
>

A very broad definition.  I now agree with you that it is too broad. Far too
broad.

>
> This highlights the fact that we've introduced this kind of amenity to
> tag a café or coffee-shop as per the text and Wikipedia.
>
> The pictures all show coffeehouses.
>
> The proposed icon that shows the most prominent feature of this
> amenity depicts a coffee mug.
>
> You can verify that this was the original intention and original icon
> of the creators as well:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:amenity%3Dcafe#Voting


You can also see the discussions there.  Some people happy to have a
way of tagging places that sold coffee and cake.  Some people happy to
have a way of describing greasy spoons.  All happy that the same tag
referred to both.

If you think the community should reserve the tag amenity=cafe for
> diners and British cafe, what tag do you think the rest of the world
> should be using for their hundreds of thousands of coffeehouses?
>

Until you came along, amenity=cafe served both purposes.  You've
convinced me that it's too broad a meaning.

>
> As mentioned by Feket, a coffeehouse usually also has something to "go
> with" your coffee, tea or other beverage, like a sandwich, a snack or
> even a piece of pie or cake they purchased (possibly from a
> cukrászda).


That's the problem.  Where do you draw the line?  Is a piece of cake food?
How about a sandwich?  Some people's lunch consists of sandwiches and
a piece of fruit.  Where do you draw the line between coffee house and
diner?


> Most small cafés around here usually lack a kitchen in
> which they could cook hot meals. I think offering something quick and
> simple like an omelette mentioned on the talk page could also be
> plausible, but people definitely aren't coming here for the food.
>

If nobody goes there for the food, why do they sell food?

I admit that 20 or 30 years ago, in Scotland, on Sundays pubs could only
sell drinks to "bona fide travellers" and only with food.  So they kept an
array of stale food on a shelf that was sold on Sundays, never consumed,
and returned to the shelf for the next Sunday.  They sold food, but nobody
went there for the food.  I doubt that situation applies to your cafes.

This also brings us back to amenity=fast_food:
>
> > A fast food restaurant, also known as a quick service restaurant (QSR)
> within the industry,


British English. and maybe just MY British English, but they're not
restaurants.  To marketroids they may be, but to me they're not.


> is a specific type of restaurant that serves fast food cuisine and has
> minimal table service. The food served in fast food restaurants is
> typically part of a "meat-sweet diet", offered from a limited menu, cooked
> in bulk in advance and kept hot, finished and packaged to order, and
> usually available for take away, though seating may be provided. Fast food
> restaurants are typically part of a restaurant chain or franchise operation
> that provides standardized ingredients and/or partially prepared foods and
> supplies to each restaurant through controlled supply channels. The term
> "fast food" was recognized in a dictionary by Merriam–Webster in 1951.[1]
>

So places selling that type of meal but have no seating are not fast food?
Or
do they count because having zero tables counts as "minimal table service"?

Note that illustrations depict Burger King, McDonald's and a fish and
> chip shop in England, and that the icon generally depicts a fast food
> item like a burger. It is true that there exist such small fast_food
> restaurants that they operate from a vehicle and they may only have
> tables, but no seats (takeaway=only and/or capacity=0), but this is a
> minority.


That may be the situation where you are but not where I am.  More than
half of the fast food outlets in my town have no seats and are takeaway
only.
Many chip shops I've encountered in the UK are takeaway only.

Takeaways pretty much have to sell fast food.  Standing in a queue for
twenty
minutes while your food is cooked from scratch is unappealing to most
people.
Fast food with seating isn't in the majority where I am.  Most takeaways
don't sell hot drinks, either, whereas cafes (British English) usually do.
Even though I may be the only person in the world to think this way,
McDonalds (with seats) fits into my "cafe" slot.

Hence I would recommend you would follow the guidance of mapping a POI
> by its primary function - i.e., _why_ people want to go there:
>

If it's McDonalds, it's usually because their children have been brainwashed
by TV adverts.

* If they regularly go there because they are hungry and want
> something unsophisticated that can be prepared real fast from
> industrial materials, they go to amenity=fast_food.
>

I'm with you so far.

* If they want to eat something that is more akin to home cooking and
> hand-made involving numerous cooking steps, they go to a restaurant
> (and hence have to pay for the chef's expertise and full wage).
>

Restaurants are expensive.  So if I want something good and I want to sit
down
but I want it cheap, I go to a cafe (British English).

* If they want to socialize and have some (mostly non-alcoholic
> drinks) like a coffee or tea, they go to an amenity=cafe.
>

Your kind of cafe.  Coffee shop here.  And even there the lines blur.

* If they are not hungry, but want to enjoy a great dessert
> experience, they go to a cukrászda.
>

Still tends to come under coffee shop, here.

>
> I don't quite see the overlap (other than putting things inside your
> mouth, but then we might as well tag everything
> amenity=human_palatable).
>

That would be simpler.  Maybe less useful, but simpler.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200630/efe2ab7c/attachment.htm>