From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

payment:app ??

How to map the payment via smartphone-app ?


In planet file from 2010-09-01 the key is only used two times. The tag is redundant, use payment:coins=* and payment:notes=* instead. Adjuva 00:31, 10 September 2010 (BST)

maybe because in contrast to coins and notes it was never noted on the wiki page. i see no problem with using cash as a shortcut for coins and notes. actually the separation is only because of vending machines. -- Flaimo 18:53, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

insufficient tagging scheme

this tagging scheme can't always be used to map, if a payment method is explicitly NOT available.


instead of payment:credit_cards=*mastercard;visa;diners_club;american_express;discover_card

it would be better to use:

payment:visa=*yes | no, payment:mastercard=*=yes | no, …

basically the same method used for different fuel types when mapping fuel stations (fuel:octane_91=yes,…). only yes | no values should be used. Flaimo 11:36, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Lulu-Ann
I would like to change the information on the wiki page to a fixed yes/no/interval list (as stated above). any objections? -- Flaimo 19:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
The old use is still by far more common (ten times more uses of payment:credit_cards=* than payment:mastercard=*), so it should still be documented, even if with reasoning why it's not adequate. Alv 16:08, 6 September 2011 (BST)


if i read it correctly, than "EC" and "Maestro" are the same thing: . if that is the case we should eliminate "EC" since it is only a synonym used in germany. Flaimo 23:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

"EC" and "Maestro" are not really the same. "EC" and "Girocard" is more or less the same. "Girocard" is the new standard for the "old" EC-Cards. Most EC-cards or Girocards does also have the Maestro Logo and the Maestro function. But there are also many Maestro-Cards without EC or Girocard function. Most EC oder Girocard accepting shops does not accept cards which have only the Maestro function. Therefore a further tag payment:girocard=* should be used for shops which accept EC or Girocard and not accept cards which have only The Maestro function. Freestyle1984 - 6 September 2011

charging stations

The tag payment:contractID=* isn't correct, it should be payment:ref. This means the number from the charging station, a contract number identifies the user who uses the charging station. And please, if you introduce a new tag without discussion, at least wearing a corresponding notice at the page charging station. User 5359 20:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

"contractID" is the name of a billing method. [1] Lulu-Ann
Wrong: German Zitat aus dem Dokument: "Zur Identifikation halten Sie bitte Ihre Contract-ID sowie Ihr Kennwort bereit. Zusätzlich geben Sie bitte die Ladepunktnummer an, welche sich seitlich an der Ladesäule rechts oberhalb der Steckdose befindet." English Quote from the document (Google translation): "For identification, please have your Contract ID and password ready. In addition, please provide the loading point number, which laterally at the charging station is right above the outlet." The correct term was payment:ladepunktnummer or payment:ref filled with the loading point number not payment:contractID (a contract number identifies the user who uses the charging station).
it's still wrong. if I interpret the PDF right, RWE charching stations only work for RWE customers. so "contractID" isn't a payment method, but rather an authentication method, since the payment is done later on by money transfer from your debit account or credit card. mapping those charging stations together with an operator tag should be enough. if it would be a generic charging station accepting different brands, then we would have to rethink the payment tags. so i will delete it from the list when I'm rewriting the wiki page. -- Flaimo 15:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

tolltag payments

I'd suggest we add payment:tag=operator1;operator2;.... as one of the payment options to the wiki page. Basically there are lanes, where you can use a tolltag on tollbridges. There are also car parks that will accept tolltags for payment and let you automatically in and out without getting a parking ticket. Marlow 13:12, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

if you mean something like e-zpass in the U.S. i would tag it payment:e_zpass:yes -- Flaimo 15:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


The default value for josm is payment:telephon_cards (not ...card). User 5359 11:34, 16 July 2011 (BST)

josm presets are outdated. see . if a phone accepts different kind of phone cards use: payment:telephone_card:<brand name> = yes/no --Flaimo 12:37, 16 July 2011 (BST)

credit cards issued by certain banks only

While tagging payment options on automated, unmanned fuel stations, I noticed a small text next to the logos of accepted credit cards: "only cards issued by a Finnish bank". (There's also payment:notes=yes.) How to tag? Alv 16:03, 6 September 2011 (BST)

This is a valid one in Brazil, several banks supports only their special credit or debit cards in their ATM's and some supports only Brazilian issued cards - EVEN IF ACCEPTING INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMS SUCH AS VISA, MC OR MAESTRO. I havn't ventured into tagging payment forms yet (maybe other than a few telephones if they accept prepaid cards or coins) --Skippern 17:05, 7 September 2011 (BST)

payment:none=yes OR fee=no

I think fee=* is better and more used than payment:none=*. --Cordialement, gerdami 08:03, 18 August 2012 (BST)

I agree. I really didn't understand the point of payment:none=*. There is an example of possible tagging: fee=2€ + payment:none=yes. Isn't it absurd?
Adding discouragement --Polarbear w (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

payment:telephone_card VS payment:telephone_cards

payment:telephone_card is used only twice while payment:telephone_cards is used 7802 times. So are they all tagging wrong or should the wiki refer to payment:telephone_cards? --TEL0000 (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Meal Vouchers

I started using payment:meal_voucher = yes to describe if the activity accepts payment with vouchers like Ticket Restaurant or Edenred. Perhaps should be needed to further specify the brand. --Sarchittuorg (talk) 19:12, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Local currencies

According to Wikipedia there are around 2500 local currencies world wide, some of which are accepted in hundreds of shops. I would like to start mapping those shops, so what I came up with is payment:local:<name>=yes. Are there any objections agains doing it like that, or any suggestions to improve? Where should that be documented/configured so it is usable also by other tools?

I had the same question in my area. I started a discussion on the mailing-list for Belgium here : --Julienfastre (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
We are also launching a local currency in my town (Bel Monnaie), and I would like to use OSM to map the shops which take it. However we are starting with electronic money using a plastic card first (with a QR code + PIN number), before printing notes, because it's simpler to handle. Therefore I'm wondering how to express this distinction. Also, shouldn't it be listed in the currencies (something like a subspace of the ISO names, like, currency:XLC:BEL=yes ?)? Mmu man (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Too complicated

Why not simply use payment=*=method1;method2;method3... and, for unsupported options, no_payment=*=method1;method2;method3...? A few known standard values could be defined, but the set would always be open and changing (imagine all payment options available in the world...). This way would facilitate mapping and usage of this information in applications.--Fernando Trebien (talk) 18:00, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Using a value list on keys tends to create quite a mess, just look at the current values for payment, because there can be different ordering for the same set, and it's not as easy to parse and/or extend. Mmu man (talk) 16:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

contactless payment only

Some vending machines accept credit/debit cards, but only as a contactless payment [2] method, i.e. there is no "swipe" or "chip+pin" physical interface. Is there a way to tag this? E.g. here: [3].

If not, perhaps payment:contactless would be appropriate, as this method can be linked to a credit/debit card, but also to keyfobs etc. The tagging would be similar to credit_cards, as the processor is also Visa/MC/etc, like with other electronic "cards".

Join sections Debit and Credit cards

Some of the mentioned cards in both section could debit or credit, depending on bank settings. For example Visa Classic and MasterCard Standard could be debit only cards. I have one such card. I propose to join sections Debit Cards and Credit Cards into one - "Bank Cards". If some of mentioned card types are 100% debit only, it could be specified in Comment section. OverQuantum (talk) 16:40, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


One more important payment method: honesty box - you are asked to pay by cash into a simple box (not unusual in rural areas) --GerdHH (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

That's just payment:cash, though? The enforcement (or lack thereof) doesn't really matter for the distinction. --Tordanik 15:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure either differentiating would be a good idea, it'd be like adding a "please rob me" tag ;-) Mmu man (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


What do you think about the tag payment:token_coin=X? There is now a discussion in the German forum [4]. For example, to pay for parking, at charging stations or in laundromats? See also [5] RoGer6 (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)


I have filled the definition of "token". I want to ask for correction. RoGer6 (talk) 00:15, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


I don't know how it is the rest of the world, but in Canada and (to a lessor extent) the United States have cardlock gas stations, which allow customers with special post-paid cards issued by that chain to purchase fuel at designated cardlock-only unattended pumps. They are preferred by by commercial drivers and often found by major highways. Tagging these properly is critical because while most are located adjacent to conventional gas stations, some (particularly those in the CO-OP network) are built in sparsely populated areas where it would be less viable to operate a staffed station, and they are effectively useless for those without the appropriate card. We discussed tagging them as access=private on Talk-ca so that they would hopefully be ignored by any GPS units, but it many be best to create a new tag to accommodate them. There are several networks, but since with one exception they are limited to one or two brands I don't think it's necessary to create a separate tag for each. --Sammuell (talk) 03:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

At Germany there is a similar concept tankpool24. The situation is exactly the same: You cannot get any fuel as long as you are not member (have a customer card). I support your proposal to tag them access=private. But as payment I propose to use an individual tagging, which is payment:tankpool24=yes/no along with payment:credit_cards=no, payment:debit_cards=no and payment:cash=no. --U715371 (talk) 13:26, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


Would adding such a tagging method be useful? In my city, vending machines that sell public transport tickets accept coins up to a certain amount, and require using cards beyond that amount. I suppose that "payment:coins:max=50" would be the right way to convey that info, wouldn’t it? Bxl-forever (talk) 10:45, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

It is not clear from your wording what max should mean. I recommend introducing more specific tags, here are a few examples that come to mind (but do look up other synonyms as well before deciding)
  • payment:coins:max_count,
  • payment:coins:max_total_count,
  • payment:coins:max_count_per_denomination,
  • payment:coins:max_amount,
  • payment:coins:max_total_value (I guess the last two would need currency specification as well, but defaulting to the local currency also sounds reasonable)
A related restriction is that certain simple vending machines only accepts a subset of all coins and/or banknotes. What should be the scheme for these? payment:coins:50HUF=yes and payment:coins:100HUF=yes along with or instead of payment:coins=yes? Or perhaps payment:coins=50HUF;100HUF? Alternatively payment:coins:accepted=50HUF;100HUF?
Another related restriction is when a place only accepts credit and debit cards above a certain sum. It could be tagged something like payment:debit_cards:min_amount, but we should definitely unite the wording before starting to use it.
Bkil (talk) 11:25, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for this. Yes, I meant max_total_value in this case but your other suggestions also make sense for other cases. Bxl-forever (talk) 11:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


There are more and more different crypto-currencies, 1025 at the moment. Using Bitcoin is expensive (this will hopefully get better soon) and there are some new alternatives like Dash which are getting more popular. Indicating all of them with a separate subtag of payment might be cumbersome, and it's likely that there will be payment processors in the future that accept many of the popular cryptos. Although most cryptocurrencies have three letter code similar to the fiat currency ISO codes, there are also problems with them, sometimes it's confusing like in the recent case of Bitcoin Cash and its BCC / BCH debate.

I suggest to indicate cryptocurrency acceptance with payment:cryptocurrencies=yes and the acceptance one particular crypto with payment:cryptocurrencies:bitcoin or payment:cryptocurrencies:dash (and mark payment:bitcoin deprecated).

What do you think?


The key should be written payment:ov_chipkaart. User 5359 (talk)