Talk:Tag:amenity=cafe

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Proposed features/Cafe)
Jump to: navigation, search

More or less public access

How do we map cafes, that have limited public access? For example a cafe inside a bookstore usually welcome non-customers? A cafe in a hospital is usually open to the public, but it is typically not used by people that have no business at the hospital. A restaurant/cafe/canteen in a private company are for employees, customers, etc. A cafe in a social facility are for residents and their family. A cafe in a prison is for inmates. Adults will feel out of place in a school cafe Elgaard (talk) 13:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

That would be with the access=* key. For example access=private for a cafe limited to employees/guests. The default would generally be access=customers. --Pbb (talk) 12:27, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

old content

Is Tim Horton's (a large Canadian chain of shops that sell coffee, donuts, a limited selection of sandwiches, etc) considered a "cafe" or "fast_food"? Andrewpmk 04:39, 13 August 2007 (BST)

I guess this is similar to a Starbucks, right? I would consider those shops primarily to be a cafe. RalfZ 12:17, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Tags

<k="amenity" v="cafe">

Generally only applies to nodes Node

Using on areas Area hasn't been discussed/approved anywhere yet

  • Is this still true? According to the main page it can be used on areas as well as on nodes, just like the other "food-related" amenities (e.g. amenity=restaurant, amenity=fast_food). Both Osmarender and Mapnik seem able to render the tag on areas correctly, so I don't really see a need for keeping this explicit restriction. --Quini 08:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Examples

name=Barista
amenity=cafe
cuisine=coffee_shop
name=San Marco
amenity=cafe
cuisine=italian

See Also

amenity=restaurant
amenity=fast_food


Original Proposal

We obviously need to be able to find coffee, so, we need to be able to tag it, this proposal is to let us do just that...


Usage

<tag k="amenity" v="cafe"/>

Examples

Coffee.png

<tag k="amenity" v="cafe"/>
<tag k="name" v="Myth Cafe"/>

Icon Design

Icon was my first go at using Inkscape for anything other than viewing maps, so, it probably needs something before it could be used... I have the svg file, but the wiki wouldn't let me upload that, so, please contact me if you want/need it... Dtucny 04:38, 26 June 2007 (BST)

Opinion

While I'm quite in favor of this (I want to tag coffee shops in Tehran), I wonder what this really means. Does this only include places that sell coffee, or it will also include a teahouse? What if a restaurant also serves coffee? Will this still be a cafe if there is no sitting place (where people will be able to sip their drink standing or may carry them off)? Roozbeh 12:27, 19 April 2007 (BST)
If we need to distinguish between entities which sell only coffee, those that sell only tea, and those that sell both, then possible tag them all as amenity=cafe and then a beverage field for ones which only sell one type of beverage? By default a cafe would have seating, we could possibly have some sort of subtag to indicate sit-down or take-away or both, which would also be usable for restaurants. Morwen 13:04, 19 April 2007 (BST)
I look forward to class=greasy_spoon! I'd imagine that some cultures/countries/regions should just have their own tags that cater for their amenities. In the UK a cafe is as likely to sell cheap tea and greasy fried eggs as classy coffee with a newspaper :) People would generally know if a restaurant is likely to sell coffee - do we need to list everything on their menu? What I'm trying to say is that "amenity=cafe" can be understood just fine in Italy and the UK, even if they serve different stuff, and maybe Iran would benefit from amenity=teahouse. TomChance 20:24, 19 April 2007 (BST)
I was going to go with teahouse as a next proposal as I've got plenty of them to tag here too and they really are normally a very different type of place to a cafe... As I see it, cafe would typically infer coffee, tea, sit-in or takeway and food availability and while these could all be individual subtags that could apply to all sorts of food and beverage type places, I think it would be good to just get the main key in there to start with and look at any further food/beverage additional information tagged as a separate step... Sound good? Dtucny 04:20, 20 April 2007 (BST)
  • I've mapped/lived/worked in a lot of countries. amenity=cafe nicely fills the gap between amenity=restaurant and amenity=fast_food. This set gives people a rough guide to what they are generally looking for: Expensive, less expensive, cheap and formal, informal, very informal. I already use it extensively.
I'd define a cafe on a world-wide scale as "a generally informal place with sit-down facilities selling beveridges and light meals and/or snacks."
Like some of the respondants above, I toyed with the idea of amenity=tea_shop and amenity=coffee_shop but abandoned it as impractical. There is no obvious cut-off; is an Australian place that sells mostly just coffee but offers cake a cofee shop or a cafe? Instead I use a cuisine= tag with values according to local practise. cuisine= teashop, coffee_shop, greasy_spoon should satisfy the concerns above? cuisine=teashop will mean one thing in Iran and a chintzy place for old ladies in the UK.
MikeCollinson 08:05, 11 June 2007 (BST)


Voting

I approve this proposal. MikeCollinson 08:08, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --Hawke 22:22, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --RobertWyatt 16:36, 11 June 2007 (CST)

I approve this proposal. --Adam Schreiber 17:58, 11 June 2007 (EST)

I approve this proposal. --SlowRider 22:57, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. TomChance 23:05, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. Nikolaj 23:40, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. Matthew Newton 23:44, 11 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --Cohort 00:18, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. Ivansanchez 01:33, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. Phillip@comsomol.org 09:05, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --Onion 09:27, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --spaetz 13:59, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --Dido 14:13, 12 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --Ketti 11:34, 13 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --LastGrape 0:11, 14 June 2007 (BST) - and liked Mike's comments that it could fit nicely with the other two food places, but avoid using more.

I approve this proposal. Bruce89 00:23, 14 June 2007 (BST) - if only most elections were as conclusive.

I approve this proposal. Cagri 18:54, 15 June 2007 (BST)

I approve this proposal. --K2 21:34, 23 June 2007 (BST)

PASSED. Now on Map Features

amenity=internet_cafe

The definition describes a cafe as "a generally informal place with sit-down facilities selling beverages and light meals and/or snacks."

However, it then goes on to say an "internet cafe" should be included here. Historically, such businesses often did indeed sell beverages or food, but this is not their primary business, and I don't believe they belong here. (See also the discussion pages for internet_access and copy_shop, both of which make the same point.)

I have expanded the amenity=internet_cafe wiki page to note the existence of places that primarily sell communication services (internet, phone, fax) that might not offer food at all, or if they do, it's only a sideline. Places that primarily sell food and beverages, while offering internet services as a sideline, are really a different sort of animal.

I chose the route of expanding the existing internet_cafe page after searching through Taginfo and reading previous proposals. There are several hundred places already tagged with amenity=internet_cafe. A couple of hundred are also tagged variously with shop and/or amenity with a value of internet_cafe or (tele)communication(s). One previous proposal for such places was to use shop=communication; however, that page now redirects to shop=mobile_phone, which only underscores the confusion.

The term "internet cafe" is widely used in the English-speaking world, but the concept also translates into several languages. In Brazil they're lanhouses. In Japan, net cafes. In the Netherlands, cafe nets. See the expanded wiki page for others.

Existing places tagged amenity=cafe + internet_access=yes will remain ambiguous (there are several hundred) but at least someone looking for internet access will find it, even if they don't find an internet cafe.

I have formally submitted this as a Request for Comments here. At the least, the amenity=cafe page will need to be modified to suggest using amenity=internet_cafe for places that primarily sell communication services, much as the latter page already does suggest using amenity=cafe for places that primarily sell food or beverages.

Johnparis (talk) 16:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)