[OSM-talk] Another large edit gone wrong (McDonald's)

[Dave F.]

On 04/03/2011 22:29, Alan Mintz wrote:
> At 2011-03-04 10:54, Dave F. wrote:
>> On 04/03/2011 15:17, Toby Murray wrote:
>>> Talking about it on IRC, someone noticed that the same user did a
>>> similar thing with WalMart ->  Walmart which also resulted in the same
>>> error.
>>>
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7454666
>>
>> Just to be clear -  McDonald's (with a possessive apostrophe) is 
>> correct when used for the infamous burger chain:
>>
>> http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/websites.html
>>
>> Yes, I know it shouldn't have, but that's the way they want it
>
> What do you mean? The fictional character is Ronald McDonald, and it's 
> his joint, so possessive is appropriate, no?

http://www.apostropheabuse.com/2007/11/abuse-from-mcdonalds.html

The creation of the (v. scary) clown came after the creation of the 
'restaurant'.

Neither Starbucks not Walmart have one.

The name of the company is McDonalds, so anything belonging to them 
should be McDonalds's.

>> The user also amended drive_through to drive_thru, but has since 
>> reverted those.
>
> Is drive_through=yes the accepted tag now? When I started, I couldn't 
> find one, so I emulated the access=* style and used motorcar=yes on 
> any amenity=fast_food|restaurant that has a drive-through. I tag 
> motorcar=no on amenity=fast_food that specifically doesn't have it, 
> but do not tag anything on amenity=restaurant (since most of what I 
> consider restaurants would need to be tagged "no"). Should these be 
> changed?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drive_thru

> It reminded be to check up on taginfo for 'donuts'. There's over 130 
> of them (excluding names).
>
> I'm surprised that's all. As you point out, it is acceptable enough 
> that it is often used in names.

Yes, but *not* as a part of shop= or cuisine=. That's just pain wrong.

>> Can anyone think of any other crude labelling that should be corrected?
>
> Now that's funny. Last time I looked at TW, I was exhausted before I 
> got to about ak*.

I'm not surprised, but I was think any obvious ones off the top of your 
head.

Dave F.