Talk:Proposed features/Takeaway drink shops
distinction from amenity=cafe
I think we have to be clear to essentially separate the cuisine (coffee vs bubble tea) from the type of establishment.
So then a coffee stand/kiosk with no seating that only sells takeaway coffee would be tagged shop=drinks + cuisine=coffee, and vice versa a place that mainly sells bubble tea, but has seating and potentially even table service would be amenity=cafe + cuisine=bubble_tea.
Of course ideally we'd tag things like indoor_seating/outdoor_seating=yes/no, takeaway=yes/no/only, cusine, drink:*=yes to try and clarify what's provided.--Aharvey (talk) 10:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
The proposal text does not make it clear if this tag could be used for places which sell alcoholic beverages. What if you can get a shot of rum in your "smoothie?" I think places that sell alcohol should be tagged differently. --Jeisenbe (talk) 14:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- It should depend on the culture of the country. For instance I could get a smoothie with rum in a normal beverage shop and I could drink it in anywhere in my country, so for me to tag it as another feature is unreasonable. But I know that in some country that is illegal. In those country they can consider to use another better tag. --tntchn talk 08:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- Presumably the same way we'd tag coffee shops/cafes that also serve wine, and whether restaurant serves alcohol along with food or not? drink=*, in this case drink:rum:yes=*. In some regions it might be normal that these places will include alcohol so this won't need to be tagged most of the time, just like alcohol isn't often tagged for restaurants. In other regions it's normal that these places will not serve alcohol and that normal case won't need tagging either. --Jarek Piórkowski (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
I know you wrote in your proposal, that for you, the tagging with amenity=cafe looks like that someone can stay there for a longer time. But for me the takeaway=only tag already clearifies that there's no seating at all (because you can only take your drinks away). If this tagging is not clear enough, what's wrong with adding the seating-tags? I can imagine a tagging like this: amenity=cafe + cuisine=* + takeaway=only + indoor_seating=no + outdoor_seating=no
- I agree with you. I would use the tag amenity=cafe for any place that sells coffee and tea, plus perhaps some small food items, whether or not it has any seating. For example, here in the USA we have chain of coffeshops called "Starbucks", which might have a large space with nice seating indoors, but it can also be a small counter inside of a supermarket with a couple of chairs, or it can also be a drive-thru with no indoor or outdoor seating. But all the same kind of drinks and food are available at each one, so why not use the same tag, and then use takeaway=only if needed? --Jeisenbe (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Because the definition of the word "café" doesn't mean the place only providing drinks. According to Coffeehouse - Wikipedia, café usually be a place people can relaxing, meeting, reading, doing business things, and even working (I am a freelancer and sometimes I really would go to a café doing my tasks). If a place only selling coffee for those who wants to bring it to office I think that is a "coffee shop" but not a "café". The same idea is able to use on a shop selling vegetable juice or something. Apparently the mappers nearby my city don't like the cafe tag, they'd rather use the shop=beverage tag which represent another kind of shop. So I propose to use the new tag to reduce the confusion. --tntchn talk 08:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)