Currently I am mapping and reviewing some pois. When I enter the name I use the signed name, and the name only. For example, this is a sign outside a local restaurant. The name of the restaurant is “Swinkckels” so I map amenity=restaurant and name=Swinkckels. The descriptive term “restaurant” is not added to the name. But is still implied due to the amenity=restaurant tag.
Now what I noticed is that some pois don’t use the generic descriptive term of a given category. Instead, they use synonyms of that category.
For example, this other local restaurant is named “Ciao”. However instead of using the generic term “restaurant” they use the term “trattoria”. This is then mapped amenity=restaurant and name=Ciao.
However, I would like to specify the deviation of the descriptive term.
Prefixing these terms to the name would be inconsistent. I have looked at different name tags, however I could not find what I was looking for.
I would like to know how you handle this situation. And is there a tag to specify this?
There are multiple name tags, most of which are used by data consumers’ search algorithms. In cases like this, I would use official_name=Trattoria Ciao or alt_name=Trattoria Ciao. Granted, the most fitting could be long_name, but it is not very popular, so it might not be parsed.
A very similar question had been discussed in the german subforum long time ago and the majority of the participants stated they would tag names of restaurants and shops which are verifyable by signage at the object and I think that makes sense.
A restaurant operated by family Swinckels can do business under lots of names
Swinckels Restaurant - Swinckels Corner - Chez Swinckels - Swinckels Tavern etc. etc. not to talk about Pizzera, Trattoria and the like. Or also just “Swinckels” without any attachment. All these are real names, usually signed exactly like that on the object itself and also entered with these full names in any listing like restaurant finders or phone books.
So the most simple way to avoid any confusion with alternative terms used for “restaurant” in the objects name is to include the term into the tagged name. I do not see a problem in tagging the ciao trattoria with name=ciao trattoria because that is the restaurants real name.
The name of the amenity as it looks to me, it is ciao (written in large letters) and the kind of amenity (written in small letters) is a trattoria, in other words a restaurant (in OSM terms), you can go there to get some food. Perhaps the cuisine=* key of use?
Maybe not very related, purely to bump this worthwhile question: Suppose the most common case to illustrate this issue is Starbucks, which has “Starbucks Coffee” on both the storefront signage, and the logo. Currently =Starbucks Coffee has been used as official_name= on some presets. Name Suggestion Index
Technically, it does show it’s not a Starbucks Reserve. For the latter, it can yet be signposted “Starbucks Reserve Roastery”, and even “Starbucks Reserve Roastery & Tasting Room”.
Thanks for all youre diverse and detailed awnsers.
I believe that splitting poi information into small spererate and specific tags, like operator, branch, brand, name etc. Increases the quality and ability to parse pois.
My example/explanation might not have been good enough, I was going into this looking more for a separate tag, that does not include the name. Simmilar to how branch= houses a specific part of the poi without repeating the name.
When entering the name, I only add the name. Other words or phrases are generally in a smaller font or on a new line, indicating they are not part of the name.
Adding these terms to the name leads to very inconsistent naming. Already in this topic name=ciao trattoria was suggested but if trattoria whould be added to the name it would come first like name=trattoria ciao
Other formats that I have come across are:
name=descriptive term “name” name=descriptive term - name name=name slogan name=name | slogan
I think that description comes closest to what I was looking for, however that is not quite right.
For now, I think I’ll just leave them alone.
The suggestion from @Hungerburg is actually a very good idea. For example, a cuisine=sushi could be parsed to sushi restaurant. cuisine=pizza could be parsed to pizzaria. Etc.
No, it is not a silly question at all. With these descriptive terms, they change the order based on the context and place.
On signs, businesses usually place their name first. And the description/category second. But when talking about themselves, like on the menu or website or when the sign is horizontal. They flip the order, like “We are restaurant Swinkckels”. Or “Welcome to trattoria Ciao”.
This is what I mean by if you don’t stick to the name only there will be inconsistencies between how these descriptive terms will be processed into the name.
Browsing through this forum, I found a reference to semi-abandoned name:prefix and name:suffix tags. I think it was a promising idea, although it found use only in a few corners of the world.
Just because a term is descriptive doesn’t mean it cannot be part of a name. Generally, if you opt for omitting the “descriptive” parts of a name, it would be nice to store them in a different tag. For example, a trattoria is related but not exactly the same as a ristorante, or osteria or taverna or fraschetta or tavola calda, hence the different terms, although all would be tagged as either amenity=restaurant or maybe cafe, I guess. If you want to preserve the subtle differences, the term should be tagged.
I have sometimes been using “restaurant:type:it” as the key, and added a list of types (sometimes not so rarely their signs declare several types for their establishment) in local language. Nowadays I mostly just add the “full name” including “descriptive” terms, unless it gets too long.
Yes, this may happen but it is not generally the case. Anyhow I would not bother about that and tag the name as signed at the premises.
I do not think this will work because most restaurants offer a wide range of cuisine. A pizzeria usually will also serve pasta, meat dishes and probably local specialities.
I still believe that following the KISS rule the most simple and clear way to catch up with this problem is to tag the full name. Why would “Casa Swinckels” or “Swinckels Corner” be a valid name in OSM but “Trattoria Swinckels” or “Swinckels Tavern” not?
