[Tagging] opening-hours and closing-hours
Robin `ypid` Schneider
ypid23 at aol.de
Sun Mar 16 14:43:38 UTC 2014
On 14.03.2014 15:45, fly wrote:
> Did you every think about "00:00-24:00; Fr 14:00-22:00 off"
> I really do not get your problems as the syntax already allows a lot.
> Still do not have any need for "open/closed" or closing_hours.
I strongly represent the opinion that closing_hours is unnecessary. Please give
me an example which can not be expressed with the current syntax and would be
covered by the proposed closing_hours.
To elaborate a little more on the point of having the 'open' and the 'closed'
keywords. They became mandatory with the introduction of comments. Because a
comment is by default evaluated to the state "unknown". But there are many cases
in which the comment does not influence if the facility is open but rather gives
additional information. (Search for 'open "':
open\s+": is used 152 times
closed\s+": is used 42 times
(\s+ stands for one or more white space characters for example spaces).
> One good point about the discussion is that "appointment" is considered
Is valid since the existence of comments. Also search for 'open "':
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:opening_hours. Some mappers have the
intention to define keywords but this is not proposed yet (and I am not working
on an proposal for this either).
> On 14.03.2014 12:37, André Pirard wrote:
>> On 2014-03-13 19:06, Pieren wrote :
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Robin `ypid` Schneider <ypid23 at aol.de> wrote:
>>> It's unclear if your proposal is "opening_hours=SH(summer holiday)" or
>>> "opening_hours=SH" (then you should correct the wiki because the tag
>>> template is using the first version)
>>> I guess you plan to update the main "opening_hours" wiki if the
>>> proposal is accepted ?
>> As well as
>> * choose one of the 5 or 6 contradictory forms, each denying the
>> former ones, that were answered to my case that I finally proposed
>> unambiguously as *closing-hours=Fr 14:00-22:00* (in a message
>> followed by -1 -1 -1 and 2 or 3 more contradictory tags)
>> * if the answer to the simplified diagram I added to try to clarify
>> many things is really "it's wrong", say what is wrong and correct it
>> * especially, regarding *your* particular proposition
>> *opening_hours="open; Fr 14:00-22:00 off"*
>> o explain: "open" and "closed" appear to be some new invention
>> [*of mine, *in the diagram]
>> o write a definition for *off* or validate/correct the definition
>> in my diagram and explain the following replies to this request
>> or its usage:
>> + it's not used;
>> + it's used but not like that;
>> + *off* must not be defined but grasped;
>> + the meaning of "off" is wrong
>> + "off" [must not be defined because it] has been in use for
>> quite some time already.
>> + http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Time_domains
>> explains quite well how the overall opening_hours syntax
>> works (why then did I have to add its URL to the main page?)
Not sure what you are saying. 'off' is equal to 'closed' as defined here:
>> o write a definition or *open*, make up your mind between, and
>> + "open" and "closed" appear to be some new invention
>> + It was introduced by Netzwolf some years ago because it is
>> needed as <rule_modifier> (when used together with a
>> comment). It is now used over 150 times to do exactly that
>> (regex: /open\s+"/). Of course it is an invention but one
>> which is required
>> + make explanations for the general tagger (I'm fine with
>> regexp but not everybody)
>> o clarify: "Because of the definition that following rules will
>> overwrite previous once, times which span over midnight have to
>> use additional rules which are separated by comma instead of
>> semicolon. "
>> + probably "override previous ones" and general syntax
>> + instead of a casual remark about an example, make it a
>> proper explanation
>> # of the difference between comma and semicolon
>> # of how rules override one another; "graspingly", ranges
>> specifying opening time would add themselves to opening
>> time and ranges specifying closing time would subtract
>> themselves from it, but I've seen an example for which
>> the range was said to both add and subtract.
I and Netzwolf did try to explain it and I would say it is straight to the
I suggest you to play a bit with the evaluation software and just try it out:
>> BTW, if the only reaction to *closing-hours=Fr 14:00-22:00* is -1 -1 -1
>> vs all of the above (and more) for the *opening-hours= ?_0 |?_1 |?_2
>> |?_3 |?_4 |?_5 *... attempted equivalents, then my *closing-hours
>> *proposition is obviously not a question of opinion or liking but an
>> absolute necessity.
See above and the previous answers to your thread about closing-hours.
>> Hoping this will help,
Live long and prosper
More information about the Tagging