Proposal talk:Ice cream

Use of amenity namespace

The amenity namespace is overused :) Since what you're describing is clearly a shop, why not add it to the existing set of shop=* types?

-1 on shoving it into amenity=*: even if there are more of those in the database right now, 50 is a very small number. +1 on proposing it as shop=ice_cream instead and writing a script to retag the small number of amenity=ice_cream instances to that.

We have them in this country too and indeed in this city, so I see a reason for tagging this item. But not as an amenity: new usages of amenity=* should really be public, civic amenities IMO. --achadwick 09:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

There has been a bit of discussion on the Italian mailing list whether this should be an amenity or a shop. It was decided that it should be an amenity because it is more similar to a cafè or a biergarten (indoor place where you can eat) than a bakery. --FedericoCozzi 22:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree to that. We have already an amenity tag that fits to an icecream shop - fastfood. So amenity=fast_food + cuisine=ice_cream would describe it real good, without need of additional tags.

+1 for not using amenity. There is nothing of amenity for this tag and there is everything from shop.

In JOSM's presets?

Sorry to fact-check your proposal, but you were claiming support in JOSM's presets for amenity=ice_cream. I checked [[1]], and it is not there. Which version of JOSM were you talking about? --achadwick 20:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I made a mistake. It is not offered as a preset, but JOSM shows an icon for amenity=ice_cream (and it doesn't for shop=ice_cream). Therefore I reverted your edit but corrected the mistake. --FedericoCozzi 22:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry being detail focused, but see Tagging for the renderer. This means "it is supported by more software" cannot be held as a "reason" for the proposal. Change/move it it to something like "current usage".

This is a cuisine value

Use cuisine=ice_cream on any restaurant, cafe or kiosk that sells ice-cream. This is already well used, see tagwatch. --Lulu-Ann 13:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

^{[ dead link ]}

Good to know. So I guess it would be shop=yes and cuisine=ice_cream . Logictheo 08:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it's rather amenity=cafe and cuisine=ice_cream. Lulu-Ann

Yes, I use that and amenity=kiosk and cuisine=ice_cream for the small places. MikeCollinson 10:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

What does it help if you are the only person using that combination? Nobody will find the ice cream, that's all. If it is "small" then it is a node, if it is "big" then it is a building=yes area.

--Lulu-Ann 13:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Ice cream is a particular product type so we don't need a new amenity type for it. We use cuisine=ice_cream as combo tag on cafes/fast_food. A dedicated "ice cream parlour" is still pretty much a cafe. A little ice-cream shop is a amenity=fast_food.

MikeCollinson agrees with you too Lulu-Ann. Are you saying he's wrong to suggest 'amenity=kiosk'? In any case all three of us dislike this proposal for amenity=ice_cream

-- Harry Wood 17:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

this (as always) depends on the context. There is a huge difference between a cafe/kiosk that sells industrial icecream (often besides others), and a kind of pastry shop, that sells (mostly exclusively) homemade artisanal ice cream. Then there is a huge difference whether they offer some places to sit down (cafe-like structure, IMHO best represented with amenity=cafe, cuisine=ice_cream) and a pure shop to take ice cream away or delivering it (IMHO shop=ice_cream). -- Dieterdreist 14:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree to Dieterdreist. amenity=cafe and cuisine=ice_cream isn't appropriate to describe these small ice cream parlours. I'd suggest to add shop=ice_cream to the shop=* list because amenity is overused and fuzzy. --Gkai 12:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

But all the shops that sell prepared food (restourant, cafe, fast_food) are amenities... --Gwilbor 15:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we could use food=ice_cream then and establish a new key that is IMHO better than amenity (I think we should abandon amenity=*). --Gkai 15:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Whe have a food-tag. It is called "cuisine"! Lulu-Ann

+1, use amenity=kiosk/cafe and cuisine=ice_cream. Wiki is updated to make it clear how to tag ice cream shops. --Kslotte 15:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

-1 This has been widely discussed on italian ML (original purpose is 1 yr old), and the conclusion is that this kind of tagging is not clear for the italian situation: we have lots of cafe selling ice creams (not produced in place, but produced by big industries, such as IT:Algida, DE:Langnese, EN:Wall's ice cream, ES:Frigo, FR:Miko), but we also have ice cream shops producing on their own and selling ice creams. We think that a distinction between these two categories of shop/amenity/whatever *needs* to be made, both for a better description of the reality and for better routing a person who wants to eat either an industrial product or a home made one. Here's the reason why this proposal has been raked up. --SteveVG 15:52, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

We could use shop=ice_creamery but I wouldn't make this distinction on the top level. Maybe we can use cuisine=homemade_ice_cream or something similar. --Gkai 18:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

We should just use either a operator=* or indroduce an new tag ice_cream=home_made/industrial_made

It would be a subtle distinction anyway, as most of the so called "home made ice cream" are based on an industrial mix. --Kaitu 16:56, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

On the page there reads "Ice cream shops are already mapped but there is no standard tag." ... This is wrong since it exist, see above. The statement really manipulates people at the voting. I suggest that voting should re-started after the introduction have been corrected. Anyway has the voting actually been opened officially by sending an e-mail to tagging e-mail list? --Kslotte 13:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Where is the standard tag? I didn't find it. Kiosk, cafe and others tag may be useful to tag only some types of ice cream shops but the general case is not covered. I'd like if there is one, but since it's not the actual case I support the amenity=ice_cream tag. It's not so bad, it would have the same problems of tags like amenity=atm. --Gwilbor 15:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I've looked up some combinations of cuisine=ice_cream (used 501 times). It is used 336 times with amenity=cafe and 108 times with amenity=fast_food and 39 times with amenity=restaurant and 10 times with shop=kiosk. --Gkai 13:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I did add some information about cuisine values. Now the proposal is much more fair and more objective. --Kslotte 13:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The current approved "correct way" to map places that sells ice cream is tagging it as amenity=kiosk/cafe/restaurant/fast_food and cuisine=ice_cream. This way doesn't cover all the types of ice cream shops.

Oh, which not?

The ones that aren't neither a kiosk, a cafe, or a restaurant. And I've never seen a fast food ice cream shop, maybe someone thinks they do exist because there's a misunderstanding about the meaning of fast food. I quote from a couple of messages of Greg Toxel on the talk ml:

amenity=fast_food has a lot of baggage. In the US, that means factory-produced not-really-food of mediocre quality that is fast and consistent. A family ice cream shop is definitely not fast food even if they can serve ice cream rapidly.

I read the wiki, and it does say "concentraates on very fast counter-only service". All the US examples fit into the factory-food bin. The thing about ice cream is that how else would you buy ice cream (to eat now) other than walking up to a counter and ordering? Plus, the key part of fast food is not explained there: to be fast food you more or less have to serve some food much faster than it would be served in a real restaurant. Hamburgers in mcdonalds are being cooked before people show up, instead of to order. If an ice cream store pre-made cones to serve them in 30 seconds and therefore only had 3 kinds, and the ice cream fans thought it was horrible, then it would be fast food  :-)

I hope this helps to better understand the issue.--Gwilbor 08:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

All you said is that you interpret more in "fast food" that there is. You did NOT name any single example of type of ice cream selling way that can not be requesented with the current tagging and could be with this proposal. Can you please answer the question? --Lulu-Ann 07:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I think he did. For example, the reason why I'm here, the Eismanufaktur in Berlin. The ice is handmade, so it isn't fast food (since that would be at least partly prefabricated and standardized), it's not a Kiosk (since those sell packaged industrial ice), you can't sit in there, which disqualifies "Restaurant" and probably also Cafe, but if you should interpret Café loosely, the fact you can't get any coffee there should render it unfitting enough. In my experience, that goes for a lot of ice cream parlors, where I get scoops of ice cream filled into a cup or cone, and usually not much else. If I look for an ice cream in a foreign city, I'd look for one like that. If I want a coffee, I'd look for Café, and I expect cake and icecream to be sold in there, too. I also know I can usually find ice in a supermarket or kiosk, but these also have other central usages. I don't have a way to look for such an ice cream parlor (but when I look for one, I'm usually not interested in anything else). With the momentary broad range of tags (shop/cafe/kiosk/restaurant/fast food) I'd probably be better off looking for all POIs in a map and filter for name "Venezia"... Therefore, a tag amenity=ice_cream for such a parlor seems fitting, apt, help- and useful for me. They're special, unique, different from the other amenities and at the same time very common, which, in my opinion, warrants such a tag. Fussputnik 23:59, 30 August 2011 (BST)

Icon

User:Josias seems to have designed an icon for ice cream :-)

For all your ice cream rendering needs!

-- Harry Wood 16:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorveteria

This is probably the best way to tag what in Brazil is known as Sorveteria, they are places that sells ice cream, usually only ice cream, and have some places where you can sit and enjoy your ice cream. They are a good place to cool down on warm summer days, and a place to take your desert after a good meal on a restaurant. --Skippern 23:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

This ist amenity=shop, cuisine=ice_cream, in Brazil like in the rest of the world.

--Lulu-Ann 11:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Opinion poll

An unofficial opinion poll was started (moved from front page). This was started before any objective information about current status was published. Also no announcement had been sent out to the mailing list. --Kslotte 13:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• I don't like this proposal. This is simply amenity=cafe with cuisine=ice_cream --Lulu-Ann 22:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --Lyx 08:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --Lucadelu 14.23, 11 March 2010
• I like this proposal. --Damjang 14.27, 11 March 2010
• I like this proposal. --Tizianos 14:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --iiizio 17:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
• I don't like this proposal. I agree with Lulu-Ann. --Kslotte 19:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --SteveVG 12:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. and @Lulu-Ann: please don't hijack other people's proposals by starting votes on them before the OP does. If you want to poll, do it in your own userspace or on a page you created and crosslink -- Dieterdreist 18:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --Toaster 21:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --FedericoCozzi 13:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. --Al3xius 11:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. Yarl ✉ 10:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
• I like this proposal. Hurry up, we need any solutions for this. MichaelSchoenitzer

Who are you, anyway ? No link to OSM-user, no user-page.--Skyper 12:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

• I don't like this proposal. --Skyper 12:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC) let us discuss about getting shops and restaurants in subgroups, but do not use amenity
• I don't like this proposal. I agree with Skyper. Let´s overcome the subjective tag "amenity". --Gkai 20:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The result is that we should continue discussing this proposal further. --Kslotte 13:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Section: Usefulness

This section contains rendering speculations. I don't find this being useful information for the proposal at all. Write instead how rendering should be done (what type of icon). --Kslotte 13:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Usefulnesss is quite obvious; you need to know where to buy ice cream when you want ice cream. --Kslotte 18:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Section: Wrong subject ( redesign amenity=* )

I think we need to first talk about amenity=* and also shop=*. Right now these tags are overused and we need to talk about getting them better grouped. Especially offices and craftshops need to be introduced or do you really go shopping while waiting for a haircut at a shop=hairdresser. I also do not tag a supermarket with and tag of ice-cream although almost every supermarket in Germany sells factorised, wraped ice-cream.
There was some talk about redesigning amenity=* on talk:en but I do not know why it was not introduced as proposal, yet.
So, please let us use our energie and time to get some real improvements rather than discussing about some small unneeded changes. --Skyper 09:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't classify this proposal as unneeded. As you see the current tag usage there is much inconsistent regarding Ice cream tagging. --Kslotte 18:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Skyper, I agree with Kslotte. We are not arguing about tagging every shop/bar/cafe/supermarket/kiosk selling ice_cream here. We are talking about what in italian is called a gelateria, that is a place you go to buy/eat in place an ice cream. This is not an unneeded tag. Where I live, we have 3 gelaterie in a 200m radius. Maybe in Germany this is different, I don't know elsewhere. Here in Italy a standard tagging scheme for these places is needed, as often said on the italian osm mailing list. A brazilian user wrote in this page that it is needed there as well. The fact that shop/amenity keys are overused is true, but this is not the right place to discuss this issue. At this time we only have shop/amenity keys to tag this sort of things, we are discussing about a value to assign to one of these keys. --SteveVG 13:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

A "gelateria" is still amenity=cafe, cuisine=ice_cream. Lulu-Ann

or a amenity=fast_food with cuisine=ice_cream .The only interesting thing might be a new tag ice_cream=* with home-made/factorised.

Maybe it's just me, but if I see a "cafe" on the map, I expect to find a place that sells coffee and cake (and maybe other stuff). As most places that would qualify for the proposed tag do sell coffee but don't sell cakes, they should not be tagged as cafe. The cuisine tag is just a secondary tag telling us what specialities to expect in a place and should not be used to tell us which otherwise "normal" things would NOT be found there. Same for fast-food: If I see a fast-food place on the map, I'ld expect some form of pre-prepared or extremly quickly made hot food; I would certainly not expect to find a place selling ice-cream only. --Lyx 17:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

What you describe is not a tagging problem, but a rendering problem. Go to the Mapnik and Osmarender pages and complain there about the problem. Don't change the tagging for that! If this tag is approved, it is not automatically rendered, so you would have to ask for that there anyway (Or do it yourself)! Lulu-Ann

The problem here is, that using the cuisine tag the way you suggest it breaks the assumption that a renderer can safely ignore it. At the moment a renderer can ignore the cuisine tag and produce a "reasonable" map; only someone wanting to create a speciality map for finding places with a specific cuisine would need to check it. Using cuisine=icecream breaks this assumption; a renderer ignoring the tag is bound to create nonsense now. --Lyx 17:45, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

This leads to more discussions: Maybe we need to talk about amenity=*, introduce a new value and use that value as tag with all food-serving-places as value. (e.g. amenity=food_serving, food_serving=restaurant/cafe/fast-food). We could then also add more tags like toilets=yes/no and the rendering would be easier if you only have to look for cuisine in tags with amenity=food_serving then going through several tags of amenity=*. Well please as I wrote above: let us start talking about a amenity=* and shop=*.--Skyper 11:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Weighting of problems

I think the main reason why we don't find an agreement here is that two groups of people each focus on one specific problem while mostly ignoring the main problem of the other group:

• One group has a problem with the amenity namespace being grossly ab-/over-used and wants to avoid any more tags in that namespace, suggesting that mappers should use other matching tags, maybe supplemented with a cuisine tag.
• The other group has the problem that there is currently no accepted way of tagging an eatery that serves mostly ice-cream to eat in and take out, because that kind of place is neither a restaurant, fast-food joint nor a shop and tagging it as such would be misleading. Because other eating places are listed in the amenity namespace they suggest to add an amenity=ice-cream to keep tagging somewhat consistent.

As this is a proposal for a way to tag ice-cream places and not a proposal to reorganise the amenity namespace, the only way forward that I can see now is to propose a tag that is NOT in the amenity namespace and NOT re-using another existing tag by modifying it with an additional tag, but one that starts a new namespace that could later be used to move other similar places out of "amenity". --Lyx 22:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem with that is that additional namespace will create third group of complaints, coming from people who do not like seeing dozen of tags for the same things, or additional complexity, or think there are perfectly good tags present right now, or do not like idea that the data that was rendered on the maps so far will stop being rendered with stuff put in new namespace etc. Also, note that "stuff could later be moved to new namespace" will never happen. Some of the data will be moved, sure, but most of it will remain where it was. So everyone would have to support yet another namespace, in addition to all previous tag uses (amenity, shop, ...) --mnalis 21:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Three weeks ago there was a discussion about pubs, bars and restaurants on talk-de@osm, after which my opinion was that it was not that easy at all to destinguish between them (main question was how much food is served if any). Seems to me, that the problem does not only cover ice-cream. If we invent some better tags than a bot can do the rest.--Skyper 16:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

While I agree that new tags (if there is ever agreement on them, which doesn't sound that certain) are the way to go, they really should go in addition to existing practice. If bot went and changed old tags to news ones (instead of just appending new ones), it would make many people very angry -- there are dozens or renderers and programs which would not understand new tags for some time (and even when they all do, many people won't upgrade for quite some time), and if bot nukes the stuff they're using, they won't be happy at all. --mnalis 22:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Namespaces suck

'nuff said. There is no reason restaurants, pubs, fastfoods etc. should "share the same namespace": does it help renderers/bots/editors/converters etc. that pubs, fastfoods etc. "start with amenity="? Moreover, what if a place is both a restaurant and a fastfood? The current tagging scheme is not helpful. The current key=value scheme is perfect e.g. for maxspeed: a way either is maxspeed=50 or maxspeed=90 or something else, and all those values "mean the same thing". But what is the relationship between amenity=restaurant and amenity=pub? Are they "different sorts of amenities"? Much much better would be to tag stuff as restaurant=yes, pub=yes,..., ice_cream=yes. This way: 1. we could use two or more of those tags at the same time; 2. we wouldn't need to discuss whether an ice-cream parlour is an amenity or not. But since this is just a tiny proposal for ice-cream parlour, and not a world-wide redesign of OSM, I still think that amenity=ice_cream is the way to go. --FedericoCozzi 08:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

No ice cream vans?

Ice cream vans' pitch locations are often stable (if seasonal) over decades. Therefore they should be mapped. I suggest amenity=ice_cream,van=yes to denote such a self-propelled shop. Also, I've also known very stable locations for doner kebab vans... Lorp 01:27, 10 August 2010 (BST)

Individual vans with a stable location and regular opening_hours are sort of tiny marketplaces, so I agree they should be mapped. But as with a van you're unlikely to eat in place, shouldn't it be rather shop=ice_cream? --Kaitu 11:07, 11 August 2010 (BST)

shop=ice_cream

The already used tag shop=ice_cream covers just what this proposal suggest. I do not agree that it belongs in the shop group, rather in amenity together with restaurants, cafe's etc. But reading the descriptions in shop=ice_cream compared with this proposal it seems to me that we are on the way of getting two tags for the same. IMO if this proposal is to continue, than we need to look for a way to discontinue shop=ice_cream. That is the reason I voted against. --Skippern 18:41, 1 September 2010 (BST)

Both amenity=ice_cream and shop=ice_cream are "already used" (actually amenity=ice_cream is used more than shop=ice_cream according to tagwatch). But the real difference is that shop=ice_cream was neither discussed nor voted, while amenity=ice_cream has been discussed and is being voted. --FedericoCozzi 12:08, 2 September 2010 (CET)

But there is still no suggestion of what to do with shop=ice_cream. Should that be discontinued? Should the definition be plit between them? I miss anything about that. We are now ending up with documentation of two different tags meaning the same. --Skippern 19:38, 2 September 2010 (BST)

We already have "two different tags meaning the same". The proposal says "Ice cream shops are already mapped but there is no standard way. This proposal wants to standardize the way ice cream shops are tagged as amenity=ice_cream.". The proposal is quite unusual in the sense that it does not propose a *new* tag: it just proposes an *old* tag. It just says "please everybody, could we agree on amenity=ice_cream?". The voting process itself is quite strange: it the proposal gets rejected, it will not mean that the tag will not exist. It will just mean that we will be back to the current situation, where different tags exist. --FedericoCozzi 10:41, 3 September 2010 (CET)

But in agreeing with how to tag it you have to provide a solution for the wrong tags. It is not enough to agree in how to do it in the future if it is meant to discontinue other tags without providing a solution for how to discontinue them. --Skippern 15:38, 3 September 2010 (BST)

Wrong tags are just that, they are wrong. There is no solution to wrong tags apart from not using them and using the right tag. However I am not OSM's owner, therefore if someone does not agree to an (hopefully) agreed tag, I can't do anything. However, if this tag ever gets voted, we could put it on map features and tell everybody to use it to map ice-cream parlours. --FedericoCozzi 17:53, 6 September 2010 (CET)

But when agreeing on a right tag with many wrong tags around, you should also supply a solution how to right the wrongs. The only thing this proposal does is suggesting to agree on a specific way of tagging, but does nothing in order to correct the other. I would see a suggestion for that before the vote had started. And will continue to oppose any attempts to agree on a tag without a proposed way of correcting all the tags that end up becoming wrongs. It is irrelevant which proposal came first, which is more used, which is better if you have no proposal of correcting the others. My temporarily solution is to tag both ways in my tagging preset. --Skippern 18:05, 6 September 2010 (BST)

As soon as the voting is done, there will be a bot... there is no problem here! Lulu-Ann

And somebody should try to convince JohnSmith to give up reverting all changes on shop=ice_cream so that it can be documented correctly on the wiki how this should be tagged. --Skippern 21:50, 7 September 2010 (BST)