Am 05.05.2010 06:17, schrieb John F. Eldredge:
Yes, that is the origin of the term. However, usage of words shifts over
time, often into multiple meanings, depending upon context. From what I have
heard, a coffeehouse in Amsterdam, Holland, now means a place that sells
marijuana, not one
Am 05.05.2010 07:47, schrieb Roy Wallace:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:22 PM, John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2010 18:14, Roy Wallacewaldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
1) allow for the specification of more than one type simultaneously,
e.g. amenity=A;B, amenity=B;C, etc., or
2)
On 5 May 2010 18:30, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:
BTW: The flowchart is using highly subjective language
heavily-advertised pseudo-food which is *very* certainly not a good
way to find a concensus. Why does it try to offence junk food fans? Oh,
and the definition of pseudo
On 6 May 2010 01:06, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, but what do you do if all those functions are primary? Sometimes
this is the case.
Multiple POIs... or one node with multiple relations...
___
Tagging mailing list
Am 05.05.2010 22:36, schrieb Roy Wallace:
There's only room for grey (w.r.t. the OSM definitions) if we want
there to be.
Following the OSM discussions for years now I would say: That's an illusion.
I think I do understand your point, though, that you think it better
to keep using these
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 05.05.2010 22:36, schrieb Roy Wallace:
There's only room for grey (w.r.t. the OSM definitions) if we want
there to be.
Following the OSM discussions for years now I would say: That's an illusion.
Ok. Though I
On 6 May 2010 06:12, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think a semi-colon delimited value would be better in this
case - certainly better than multiple POIs, and no less supported
than multiple relations (right?)
If an app supports relations, it wouldn't matter if there is 1 or
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com writes:
Ok, I'll give up. But I will just point out that, while you insist it
is just asking for trouble, imagine a wiki page that says something
like:
If you're not sure whether the place should be tagged as an
amenity=restaurant, cafe or fast_food, this
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:41 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 May 2010 06:12, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think a semi-colon delimited value would be better in this
case - certainly better than multiple POIs, and no less supported
than multiple relations
(note: removed talk-us)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
... It's a big world out there and there is bound to be grey areas
that local knowledge will tags things one way or the other...
There is bound to be grey areas only if we continue to use these
On 4 May 2010 18:14, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
1) allow for the specification of more than one type simultaneously,
e.g. amenity=A;B, amenity=B;C, etc., or
2) change/specify in more detail the definitions of A, B and C so that
they *are* mutually exclusive, or
3) be forced to
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:22 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
Do you have any concrete examples?
Most McDonald's restaurants have tables and sit down areas, but we
tag them as fast food because that is the politically correct way to
refer to junk food...
The discussions have
On 5 May 2010 09:22, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
(Just to make life even hearder: is McCafe a cafe or fast food?)
Maybe it's all three at the same time...
Does it have a sit down and eat area restaurant
Is the food delievered in less than 5 minutes (usually)... fast_food
Is
At 2010-05-04 12:04, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net [2010-05-04 09:47 -0700]:
I generally regard fast_food as a place where you have to walk up to a
counter and order your food. Even if they do bring it out to your table
when ready, they will not generally come
On 5 May 2010 11:15, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Would you call dunkin donuts fast food? I do, because I get more of a
megacorp volume feel than a quality food feel there. I think most
I think you are being a tad bias, since small corner stores in
Australia sell fast food of lesser
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com writes:
On 5 May 2010 11:15, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Would you call dunkin donuts fast food? I do, because I get more of a
megacorp volume feel than a quality food feel there. I think most
I think you are being a tad bias, since small corner
On 5 May 2010 11:37, Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
I'd actually prefer something like shop=donut to cafe, since it seems that
Isn't cafe a French word for coffee?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 5/4/10 9:51 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 May 2010 11:36, Greg Troxelg...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Fair enough. If you judge on food quality and is food presented faster
than it could reasonably be preparted then I think we're in closer
agreement.
My point was, we shouldn't base a
On 5 May 2010 11:58, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
perhaps we need
crap=yes
To be more effective, and less subjective, you will probably need
sub-tagging to define who it's crap too
crap:snobby_elite=yes
crap:student=no
crap:homeless=no
etc...
On 5/4/10 11:15 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 May 2010 12:51, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
crap:mega=yes
as well.
That doesn't make any sense...
lots and lots of crap: mega crap
___
Tagging mailing list
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:19 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 May 2010 09:22, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
(Just to make life even hearder: is McCafe a cafe or fast food?)
Maybe it's all three at the same time...
Does it have a sit down and eat area
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there anything wrong with using:
amenity=cafe;fast_food;restaurant? If not, that approach, plus those
One problem would be the conversion of such a thing to GPS formats. I
guess you could stack three POIs in one place,
On 5 May 2010 14:26, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there anything wrong with using:
amenity=cafe;fast_food;restaurant? If not, that approach, plus those
It's rarely a good idea to jam tags together into a single key like
that, most applications have enough trouble with the
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
The entire reason such tagging is useful (vs. amenity=food) is that
people can ask find me a nearby cafe. When I ask that, I want a
coffee shop that serves sandwiches, or a sandwich shop that serves
coffee, or something like
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:32 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be better to tag the primary function of a business, and add
modifiers...
So amenity=fast_food + cafe=yes would be roughly equivalent to
amenity=cafe + fast_food=yes? Interesting proposal. It seems like a
On 5 May 2010 14:39, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
So amenity=fast_food + cafe=yes would be roughly equivalent to
amenity=cafe + fast_food=yes? Interesting proposal. It seems like a
plausible workaround for indicating a plurality of amenity=* values
without resorting to a
At 2010-05-04 21:32, John Smith wrote:
...
amenity=fast_food
cafe=yes/no
seating/resturant=yes/no
drive_through=yes/no
I've been using motorcar=yes/no for drive-through, similar to access. This
did require tweaking of the rendering style in JOSM, which had this tag too
far up in position (and
I'm interested in feedback on how to tag particular chain
restaurants/places. I have a copy of the OSM planet database and see
inconsistencies in how these places are tagged.
* Baskin Robbins (fast food?)
* Chipotle Mexican Grill (fast food or restaurant?)
* COSI (restaurant or cafe?)
* Five
On 3 May 2010 19:39, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote:
To guide the fast food or restaurant question, I consider whether food is
paid for prior to eating (e.g. at a counter) and whether or not disposable
plates, utensils, etc. are used. This is often consistent with criteria
used in
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 5:49 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 3 May 2010 19:39, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote:
To guide the fast food or restaurant question, I consider whether food is
paid for prior to eating (e.g. at a counter) and whether or not
disposable
On 3 May 2010 20:30, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote:
True... I think use of disposable plates, cups, utensils is more common in
the US. Whether or not the place has table service might be a better
consideration. What criteria do you use to decide?
Why does it need to be a unifying
On 3 May 2010 21:07, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote:
So it's okay for, say all the Burger Kings, to be inconsistently tagged...
some as amenity=fast_food, some as amenity=restaurant?
As I said, the majority of criteria will be similar, however there
will be differences in what people
Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com writes:
* Baskin Robbins (fast food?)
This is the missing ice cream shop I think. But if they serve other
food, it's made to order, and they have table service - restaurant.
* Fuddruckers (restaurant or fast food?)
tough call
* Panera Bread (restaurant or
On 3 May 2010, at 5:18 , Greg Troxel wrote:
Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com writes:
* Baskin Robbins (fast food?)
This is the missing ice cream shop I think. But if they serve other
food, it's made to order, and they have table service - restaurant.
* Fuddruckers (restaurant or
Liz ed...@billiau.net writes:
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
cafe - food is made to order, and while fast, it's real food.
Basically my rules are:
snip
so how would you classify the shop which sells magnificent hamburgers,
ordered at the counter, cooked to order, no table
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
That's what I meant about the slippery slope to a full ontology. The real
bug in OSM's tagging scheme is that it is structured like
IMHO, the real issue is that OSM is a map, and rating food is not map
like. At its tidiest OSM
On 4 May 2010 12:08, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO, the real issue is that OSM is a map, and rating food is not map
like. At its tidiest OSM would merely store the address corresponding
Alternatively you could have just said it was a subjective method of
tagging that the next
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:41 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Why does it need to be a unifying criteria?
Provide the tags, people will come up with their own criteria based on
their own cultural background, while they will be similar, there will
be subtle differences.
I think
On 4 May 2010 14:24, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we can avoid having multiple meanings for identical tags in
the OSM database. (though I realise you disagree, John).
I'm not disagreeing with the intent of Katie, I just don't think it's
possible to lump all fast food places
39 matches
Mail list logo
