Talk:Proposed features/Customer service
Could you perhaps use existing tags instead of this?
- I would have thought this proposal is about open customer service desks a la concierge and recepions otherwise. -- Kovposch (talk) 14:16, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- The tricky part is that even customer service offices are opened to customers only in a very small part. access=* seems a bit mysterious, I would prefer more explicit tagging, though if that proposal fails I would be also OK with using access=* @Bkil Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I hope not. Mapping receptions is a debated topic: amenity=reception_desk. While differentiating between an office that can be visited by outsiders (access=customers) vs. ones that can not (access=private) makes a lot of sense and this is how I read the introduction. -Bkil (talk) 14:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I was thinking about "customer service" as in "reception"s at shopping malls and facilities, ie the likes of concierge and service counters; not the desk receiving upon entering a site. To me, it's more about the ambigious tag key-value. Say, if the function of an access=customers office=* (values currently describe the industry / business sector) is to be explicitly tagged, something such as service=customer_service (purpose-built) or customer_service=yes (if not going down the service:customer_service=yes scheme}] could be used. amenity=customer_service makes it sounds like a POI within an office, not that the office itself is a POI. -- Kovposch (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- Or maybe adopt usage=* to distinguish front vs back office. -- Kovposch (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- customer_service=yes - I switched proposal to use that. service:customer_service=yes is silly and usage=* has problems - would be problematic for iD (it is an iD design issue, so it should and can be ignored) but also would require knowing how office is used, I want to be able to just tag that customer service is available @Kovposch Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. Now that you mention it, it may be beneficial to map the customer service point (so called "vevőszolgálat") inside a large department store or supermarket like a TESCO somehow. You need to show the product there after purchase to get a stamp on the warranty card, and it is usually far away from the cashiers. Would this schema be appropriate or is this something else? -Bkil (talk) 18:31, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I read it as for the distinction between the types of office that my county council operate. The major towns have small (two- or three-person) customer-focused offices that receive rent payments and council tax payments, deal with queries and complaints, have rolls of recycling bags, etc. There is also a large complex of offices which are not customer-focused (although one or two may be) but are where paper pushers push paper and customers only go if specially invited to. --Brian de Ford (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
customer vs. customers
As mentioned there is a osm term customers used for access=customers. Could it be beneficial to not mixing it? So using here amenity=customers_service instead of amenity=customer_service? There is always small confusion, see also ongoing iD-ticket: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/7831 --MalgiK (talk) 06:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- As I understand, it is a phrase in English. It even has its own Wikipedia article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_service Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Customer service office as a independent feature
Hi. Thanks to Mateusz Konieczny for this proposal. I was just looking for a tag to map a customer service office for public transport users (metro and buses).
In my case, these offices are independent from the company's headquarters, so I had thought of using "office=customer_service" + "operator=company_name". The "office=company" features already exist for the company headquarters on the map. I was looking for a way to map the customer service office independently. Using "office=company" + "customer_service=yes" it would seem that it is a distinct company, when in fact it is the customer service office of the same company, but located elsewhere. Isn't it a good idea to use "office=customer_service" + "operator=company_name" for a customer service office? --Dcapillae (talk) 11:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)