Proposal:Opening hours open end fixed time extension
| combined time range with open end | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Approved (active) |
| Proposed by: | Ypid |
| Tagging: | opening_hours, lit, service_times, collection_times=<time> - <time> + |
| Applies to: | database type -  ,  , 
|
| Definition: | Extend the opening_hours=* syntax to support a time range combined with open end. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Rendered as: | Not rendered on the map. Can be evaluated by software. |
| Draft started: | 2013-11-25 |
| RFC start: | 2013-12-04 |
| Vote start: | 2013-12-23 |
| Vote end: | 2014-01-20 |
Summary
I propose a syntax to combine a time range with open end in one rule[1]
Time range combined with open end (opening_hours=18:00-22:00+) is currently used about 35 times (regex \d{1,2}:\d{2}\s*-\s*\d{1,2}:\d{2}\s*\+). Another way of writing this is to use opening_hours=18:00-22:00,22:00+.
I propose this shorter syntax to have some level of clarity about tagging. See also:
- thread about the new JavaScript implementation (in German. Summary: Nadjita asking why the new implementation does not support this feature supported by the old one. User:Phobie added a example to the wiki page)
- Announcement on the tagging mailing list
- Comments (and closed voting) on the opening_hours Talk page
Example & Description
- opening_hours=18:00-22:00+ means open from 18:00 till 22:00 with open end after 22:00.
- opening_hours=sunrise-(sunset+01:00)+ more advanced opening hours :) Means open from sunrise till one hour after sunset followed by open end.
Supported by software
The proposed syntax will be supported by the „main“ implementation which I maintain[2] and all projects which use it after they upgrade their copy of it.
I would also like to see support for this in OsmAnd and opened an issue some time ago (for adding all the missing features). Right now OsmAnd will ignore this feature like many other special features in opening_hours (will not evaluate opening_hours if the feature is used). It will just show the opening_hours and will leave you with the evaluation.
Alternate tagging Suggestions?
Voting
I approve this proposal.--Dieterdreist (talk) 23:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC)- I approve this proposal.--Math1985 (talk) 23:30, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I oppose this proposal. "Open end" does not convey any useful information in itself. --Eckhart (talk) 11:20, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- This proposal is not about to introduce the "Open end" scheme. It is currently in use. This is only a shortcut for an existing (Open end) tagging. For deprecate an existing tagging feature, I think here is not the right place. --MasiMaster (talk) 17:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Tordanik 12:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --MasiMaster (talk) 17:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. Bulwersator (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal.--floscher (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. --Foxxi59 (talk) 00:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. -- Brycenesbitt (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC) the meaning of 'open end' is not clearly stated enough.
- I approve this proposal. Well known praxis for many years. See discussion! --phobie m d 01:58, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. --Dz-1 (talk) 07:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
7 approval votes / 4 oppose votes.
Comments
Please leave comments on the discussion page.