Our university library changes the opening times from time to time (exam period, after exam period, …). All toilets within the library have the same opening times as the library. The access to all toilets is public. SC asked me whether the opening times are still right. No, and they will again be different next month and change again in October.
Is there a possibility that all toilets “inherit” the opening time from the library building where they are located?
If the toilets are mapped as attribute (toilets=yes) they inherit the library’s open hours.
If they are mapped as separate POI they do not inherit the opening_hours.
You set the opening_hours of all the toilets to “same as library” (the inverted commas are important). That way you don’t get asked again and it’s correct all the timr ;)
Please explain for a beginner: Do I have to change amenity=toilet to toilets=yes?
“same as library” does not work. Now SC asks for opening times.
can you link object you tried to edit? Likely you added it without quotation marks or with weird quotation marks rather than "same as library"
(this has another problem, will not be parsed by anything)
toilets=yes would be added to library object and it indicates it has toilet somewhere
Yes, I took the quotation marks from here, and it did not work. Now I used the right quotation marks and it worked.
Thanks to all for your help.
For data users, it’s much easier if the opening hours are tagged explicitly, and without such explicit tagging lots of users are simply not going to associate the right opening hours with the toilets.
I think what we really need is a machine readable tag that says “the value of tag X on this object should match that of tag Y on object Z”. We would explicitly give tag X the copied value, and a bot would periodically go round and check that object Z still exists and tag X still matches tag Y on that object.
“Same as library” is easier ;)
to tag, but basically impossible to automatically derive actual opening hours from that
Is this the “tagging for the renderer” I was told to avoid?
no, as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mistagging_for_the_renderer involves adding fake data
here is question how to enter correct data
Defining opening_hours on a site relation is such a way.
For a beginner: What is “right” and what is “wrong”? And why?
That is a really big question and asking that here is like asking a bunch of lawyers.
Simple answer: Depends.
For more, take a look around the forum and you’ll see that this is a chaotic bunch of people trying to map the world and since people and the world are messy there usually are more ways to an end than just one.
Out of curiosity, are there really no data consumers that support inferring the opening_hours of a POI from the fact that it exists inside another feature with defined opening_hours? Here, if the toilets are physically inside the library and that’s reflected on the map, I’d personally just leave opening_hours on them untagged.
This seems like a good idea to me. Anyone want to propose a relation for this? A site relation could maybe work in this particular case but I’ve seen other cases where the objects in question aren’t really part of a single site.
@CH_HHH, silversurfer83 is correct, but since that’s not very helpful for a beginner that just wants a simple answer I think you should just do what the post that got marked as the “Solution” recommends:
Such assumption often would be wrong.
I think that most persons assume that the toilets inside a feature have just the same opening times as the feature has.
I know of one exception: We have open library hours in many of our public libraries: access with the library card, no staff present, returning and borrowing books with machine registration. During the open library hours all toilets are closed, probably because the library is afraid of vandalism. In these cases it makes sense to explicitely tag the opening hours of the toilets.
It makes also sense to tag opening hours of toilets in features which are always open (train stations, parks, …) but the toilets not.
It exists already, but with a meager level of adoption so far:
Disclaimer: I edited the article recently and came to like the concept. Inheriting opening_hours is currently not in its documented scope, but I don’t see why it couldn’t be, in theory.
Is the idea that you’d add the bathrooms as a member with role=bathroom? That might work in the same way a site relation theoretically could, but if the bathroom in question isn’t inside the library I’m not sure you could infer opening_hours just from that relation. (One could imagine a bathroom inside a mall which provides bathrooms for multiple businesses in that mall but doesn’t have the same opening_hours as those businesses.)
I think what @Robert_Whittaker was proposing was more along the lines of something like:
Relation:inherits_tags
Properties:
- inherits=opening_hours
Members:
- role=parent
- Library feature
- role=target
- Bathroom features