Currently, two different tags are in use to indicate whether payment using the Payconiq scheme is possible: payment:payconiq=* (69 uses in Belgium) and payment:payconiq_app=* (63 uses in Belgium). There is no obvious need for two keys, so I propose to simplify this tagging scheme by sticking to one key: payment:payconiq=*.
(This has also been discussed in the OSM BE Matrix room.)
Current situation
As stated above, both keys are used roughly the same amount of times. Only 2 occurrences outside of Belgium exist. The wiki page for the payment:*=* tagging scheme only mentions payment:payconiq_app=*.
Reasoning behind the change
There is no need for two different keys.
payment:payconiq_app=* is inconsistent with the meaning of an _app suffix in other payment:*=* keys. Usually, this suffix means that payment can only be made with a specific app, which is not the case here: payments using Payconiq can also be made from a variety of banking apps. It’s the name of the app (and the company), but also a payment scheme.
Proposed changes
Replace all occurrences of payment:payconiq_app=* with payment:payconiq=* by means of an automated edit. There are no occurrences of payment:payconiq_app=* outside of Belgium, however there are 2 occurrences of payment:payconiq=* in Luxembourg.
Update the wiki page to reflect the new tagging scheme.
I agree with the proposal to simplify the tags and stick to payment:payconiq=*. The current distinction between payconiq and payconiq_app doesn’t fully reflect the reality of how Payconiq is used in Belgium anyway.
As a business owner and a Payconiq user, I can confirm that whether a merchant supports Payconiq is more about whether they can display a Payconiq-compatible QR code or appear in the app. The term “Payconiq” itself is used interchangeably with Bancontact in some contexts, but there are different scenarios that affect how payments are handled:
The most common scenario in Belgium is that someone has a payment terminal and accepts Bancontact payment cards. That doesn’t mean they’ll also accept Payconiq. A lot of terminals still don’t show the ‘Payconiq’ QR code. So, if they don’t show that code and they don’t show up in the app, you can’t use Payconiq.
Some places have the terminal without the QR code displayed but have an account on Payconiq. So, if you go into the Payconiq app, you’ll see them listed there and can use it (you’ll have to specify the amount to pay yourself).
Some places will have a QR code sticker somewhere for their Payconiq account. Usually, this is a generic “fill in the amount yourself” type, similar to clicking the store in the app.
In rare cases, the QR code sticker is linked to their cash register, so it shows the correct value when you scan it (e.g., Colruyt).
Some places will have the QR code on the terminal. Does this mean they support Payconiq? Yes and no. Often this means the QR code works with the Payconiq app and other QR code scanning apps in Belgium, but they might not have a direct contract with Payconiq (so they won’t appear in the app as an option, but you can still scan the code, and it’ll work. They just don’t have a direct contract with Payconiq).
Ultimately, if a place supports Payconiq either via a QR code or app listing, the tag should simply be payment:payconiq=yes. This also avoids confusion over whether a merchant accepts payments only via the app, since in most cases most* Belgian banking apps can handle the QR code and the Payconiq app itself obviously.
payment:payconiq=* seems to make more sense to me since the “Payconiq QR code” seems to be also supported by the other banking app ; we don’t really need the Payconiq app anymore to be able to use those codes (which was the case a few years ago if I remember correctly).
