The description of cuisine=beef_noodle is so weird

I was looking at Key:cuisine - OpenStreetMap Wiki and saw the description of cuisine=beef_noodle:

beef noodle soup, originated in Southeast Asia.

For beef noodle soup, Wikipedia says

Beef noodle soup is a Chinese noodle soup made of stewed or braised beef, beef broth, vegetables and noodles.

It says it originated in China, and the noodles here are made with flour.

But if it’s in Southeast Asia, the ones I can even think of are pho and kway teow, but interestingly, both are made with rice, not flour, and they’re not tied to beef either - they could be beef, or pork or chicken.

And the rice noodles themselves didn’t originate in Southeast Asia, but China, and even the kway teow itself was brought to Southeast Asia by Chinese traders.

So I don’t think the value itself and the description of beef_noodle is valid, and it should be replaced with rice_noodle, which would encompass both beef river noodle and kway teow, as well as rice noodles outside of Southeast Asia.

BTW, I don’t think there should be ramen when there are already noodle, what do you guys think?

noodle contains a request to use more specific tag if possible. This isn’t so much about the similarity of ingredients, but rather the restaurants themselves. At least in Japan, a ramen restaurant is completely different from a soba restaurant.

Now, dumpling and gyoza on the other hand…

Please avoid debating such origins in history. This doesn’t help, and only attracts arguments. It’s clear they are different dishes now.
Problem in documentation and attribute should be distinguished. This is inaccurate documentation at first, not that the attribute itself is invalid.
=beef_noodle can be seen as a distinctive combination, similar to =beef_bowl for all the different rice serving out there. Pho seemed to be more common and well-known for the beef variety, so that can still be used when that’s the signature dish.
That being said, the 36 =pho cuisine=pho | Tags | OpenStreetMap Taginfo could be discussed for pho in general. =rice_noodle is synonymous with rice vermicelli, or increasingly popular mixian.
In general, cuisine= can be said to be disorganized and messy. But changing cuisine= directly won’t fix it.

Of the 358 occurrences of cuisine=beef_noodle, 253 were added in a single changeset across Taiwan. From what I can tell, they added this tag to every restaurant that contained “牛肉麵” in its name, among other bulk edits, some of which have since been undone. A similar changeset of theirs attracted some criticism about methodology.

@Graptemys added beef_noodle a couple years ago as part of a large-scale expansion of the table. I suspect they saw this usage, searched for “beef noodle” on Wikipedia, and came up with this description based on a quick reading of the Wikipedia article. The article is not well-written, but at least it makes clear that it’s talking about Chinese cuisine, even if the dish has spread to Southeast Asia via ethnic Chinese. I’m not sure any effort was made to examine actual usage of this tag in the database. The same edit introduced other definitions that contradicted OSM usage, even among Western cuisines. Still, it was a useful exercise in surfacing some cuisine tagging that had flown under the radar for a while.

牛肉麵 is the name for a family of Chinese beef noodle soups, as opposed to, say, fish ball noodle soups or stir-fry beef noodle dishes. The literal translation in English is “beef noodle soup”. Unfortunately, “beef noodle soup” also happens to be a common description of beef phở (as opposed to chicken or seafood) on restaurant menus in the West. This is only by coincidence, not because phở has anything to do with Chinese cuisine, but that’s why the Wikipedia article mentions phở.

Wikipedia has a dedicated article about phở that discusses the origins in more detail. The short story is that, as with a lot of home cooking and street food, no one really knows the origin of phở or even its name with certainty. Chinese, French, and Vietnamese people have all claimed it as their own invention, but the reality is more complicated than that. The dish itself has evolved over time, so that whatever it came from is no longer recognizable as the same dish. (Neither pot-au-feu nor stir-fried water-buffalo phở sounds particularly appetizing to me.)

The cuisine=noodle tag lumps all noodle dishes from all Asian cultures into the same category. Sometimes this stereotype is convenient; other times, it’s terribly inconvenient. What Westerners colloquially call “noodles” could be mein (麵) or fun (粉) or other things that Chinese people normally distinguish as quite unrelated concepts. Vietnamese people make even more fine-grained basic distinctions: mein could be , bún, etc. Some restaurants serve a wide variety of noodle dishes, while others specialize.

If I encounter a cuisine=noodle in a random town in the middle of the U.S., I assume it’s a noodle-themed restaurant like Noodles & Company (serving anything in the shape of a noodle, from pasta to chowmein to ramen). Or cuisine=vietnamese;noodle would be a “Vietnamese noodle restaurant” named “Phở [insert year]” that devotes the first two pages of the menu to phở and the latter four pages to other noodle soups, noodle dishes, beef stew, claypot fish, and assorted rice dishes that might be better than the phở.

On the other hand, in an ethnic enclave, some restaurants will specialize further. For example, in a Little Saigon, a restaurant will advertise itself as a bún, bánh canh, or phở restaurant. You can probably order bún from a bánh canh restaurant, but you’ll probably regret it. I’d like to use these dishes as cuisine=* values, but usually I just go with cuisine=vietnamese. I avoid cuisine=noodle in these cases, to avoid leaving a false impression about their flexibility.

In Vietnam, the tagging scheme breaks down even more. Typically, each stand only serves one noodle dish. cuisine=vietnamese is stating the obvious, and cuisine=noodle is rather meaningless given all the options.

We would be better off splitting the cuisine=* tagging scheme into dishes versus traditions. In the meantime, I suggest correcting the documentation to clarify that it’s only about the Chinese dish. That’s how it’s being used in the database, apart from one restaurant in Singapore that used to be tagged cuisine=Beef_Kway_Teow,_Mee_Pok before being retagged by a self-described “experimental data analytics bot”.

2 Likes

The cuisine=noodle tag lumps all noodle dishes from all Asian cultures into the same category. Sometimes this stereotype is convenient; other times, it’s terribly inconvenient. What Westerners colloquially call “noodles” could be mein (麵) or fun (粉) or other things that Chinese people normally distinguish as quite unrelated concepts. Vietnamese people make even more fine-grained basic distinctions: mein could be , bún, etc. Some restaurants serve a wide variety of noodle dishes, while others specialize.

what about subtagging?
noodle=…

Good point, at least it’s an option to avoid losing information that someone wants to capture. cuisine:noodle=*, diet:noodle=*, and food:noodle=* each have a dozen or so occurrences. It pales in comparison to refining cuisines inline with more specific values like ramen and udon, with a long tail of undocumented values already in use.

This fragmentation means a search for cuisine=noodle excludes the restaurants that specialize in a particular kind of noodle, as well as those that serve noodle dishes along with other dishes from the same tradition. It mainly disadvantages the noodle enthusiast community (the kind of user who would surely seek out Noodles & Company anyways). So I’m still kind of OK with cuisine=noodle and the other values as they are, but I don’t mind using one of the subkeys instead.

Interesting rundown of the various different noodle dishes out there. As a European I associate italian style Spaghetti, Pasta and Lasagna with a cuisine=noodle. I would throw the american style Mac’n’Cheese into cuisine=american and all those noodle soups you listed into cuisine=asian.

Because of the current mix of region of origin (cuisine=french), main ingredient (cuisine=noodle) and specific food item sold (cuisine=donut) we could use a system similar to healthcare:speciality to further describe the specialization (if any) of a restaurant. Something like

cuisine=asian + asian=vietnamese + cuisine:speciality=Pho

cuisine=european + european=british + cuisine:speciality=fish_and_chips

cuisine=european + european=italian + cuisine:speciality=no (generic italian restaurant)

cuisine=european + european=german + cuisine:speciality=lübecker_national (a type of rutabaga stew, with this specific variant originating from the town of Lübeck)

Have used the cuisine:speciality=* a few times, our arrosticini one of them, not to speak of the panino porchetta, but then again this is kind Abruzzo region… cuisine=regional. :o) . Go to any morning market here and you’ll find multiple food trucks selling these.

(note the proper spelling of speciality)

I like the idea of shunting specific specialty dishes to a separate key, whether food:*=* or cuisine:speciality=*.

Iterative refinement on geography is an interesting idea. After all, when someone searches for “Asian restaurants” in a navigation application, they might be interested in either pan-Asian cuisine or a particular cuisine of Asia.

I could see myself iteratively refining the tags on this restaurant in California, which specialized in Wenzhou fish noodle soup. A Chinese mapper would recognize this specialty as a part of Ou cuisine, which in turn is part of Zhejiang cuisine, which is part of Chinese cuisine, which is part of Asian cuisine. However, without particular knowledge of Chinese culture, a typical American customer would only be able to identify it as a Chinese seafood noodle soup restaurant. So we’d probably need to keep some less scientific options around anyways.

(During the time it was open, they used to get poor online reviews from people expecting standard American Chinese fare like egg rolls, moo moo gai pan, and fortune cookies. This speaks to the risk of associating a highly specialized restaurant with a broad cuisine category.)

I would not assume it, and would likely make a new thread
some people may have opinion about that without opinion about beef_noodle specifically

I have tried to use cuisine:speciality= , but it doesn’t work here. Cuisines have more aspects to distinguish. Unclear what it should specialize in. More specific aspects are needed. A “speciality restaurant” can either have a specific meaning, or be very vague.
It still have different levels mixed in. As mentioned here, pho is a type of noodles. Then you have a depth-4 =lübecker_national (stew, Germany, “National”/rutabaga?, Luebeck), which I’m unsure if diacritics should even be allowed in standardized pre-defined vals. Yours might be better put in freeform / proper noun similar to subject= with a *:wikidata= , For =ramen alone, there are many aspects already.

  • Tare flavoring
    • Soy sauce
    • salt
    • miso
      • red
      • white
  • Dashi soup base
    • Tonkotsu
    • chicken white soup
    • chicken bones
  • Location
    • Sapporo
    • Sendai
    • Niigata
    • Onomichi
    • Hakata
    • Kumamoto
    • etc
  • Specific names
    • Kakei (Yokohama)
    • Jirou (Tokyo)
  • Topping
    • Se-abura
  • I don’t know how to classify
    • Curry
    • Mapo

There’s no benefit to touch cuisine= itself. With how many uses it has, it’s almost as if it’s better left alone and ignored as crossing=

Worth mentioning 32 cuisine:crossover | Keys | OpenStreetMap Taginfo
I want to use eg cuisine:style=japanese (cf garden:style= ) + cuisine:origin=western (cf origin= ) to describe Japanese Western youshoku, and cuisine:style=western + cuisine:origin=japanese for Westernized Japanese a la california roll. But as seen here, it would be unproductive to provoke debates of origins in history, and the semantics is still poor (Japanese-style Western, or Western from Japan?).
There are still some other aspects. Cooking methods, meals, grade, venue. Key:cuisine - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Some could fall into restaurant= and cafe= , eg 19 =diner restaurant=diner | Tags | OpenStreetMap Taginfo already. restaurant=steak_house could be distinguished from food= / something =steak , as it would be served in =teppanyaki differently (and how should =omakase be categorized` ?).

1 Like

Along your discussion lines, someone decided to get started with changes and removed all cuisine=pho tags world-wide and replaced them by rice_noodles=pho.
If such a change is really wanted, I suggest to at least use the common ‘food:’ prefix instead of a new top-level key for one special food item.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:rice_noodle
Changeset: 166835002 | OpenStreetMap

I have no view on whether or not that is a good idea, but any such change should definitely be discussed first (and here’s as good as any).

2 Likes

rice_noodles=pho is an unfortunate choice. I don’t understand why we would tag phở and bánh canh restaurants so differently just because phở and bánh canh noodles are made of rice. Will we have a wheat_noodles=* key for mì and pasta and mung_bean_noodles=* and tapioca_noodles=* keys for miến (glass noodles), depending on the ingredients list on the package of noodles the cook happened to pull from the shelf today? Never mind that the languages associated with some of the recently documented rice_noodles=* dishes have no word for “rice noodle” per se.

maybe it would be possible for DWG to revert it in meantime?

I’d suggest doing the basics first:

  • Explain to the mapper what the problem is (you’ve started doing that - thanks)
  • Figure out the extent of the data that needs reverting - is there any complication that might need extra work (subsequent edits, unrelated edits in the same changesets, that sort of thing)
  • Once the mapper is on board, if it’s just a “simple revert” without complications, it may be that they can do it themselves (since they did the mechanical edit themselves) or it may be that someone else here can.
  • If it does need DWG expertise** then email data@openstreetmap.org to log a ticket so that one person and one person only attempts the revert (rather than multiple people doing it at the same time).

** it surely won’t need “DWG powers” (redaction, blocks) but may need DWG experience.