I have Mo-Su 07:00-20:00 "Pedestrians"; Mo-Fr 08:00-16:00; Mar 21-Sep 21 Sa-Su,PH 08:00-19:00; Sep 21-Mar 21 Sa-Su,PH 09:00-17:00
Is there a definition of the seasons somewhere , or you are guessing it? Using months only, and commenting on the seasons would be less strict.
Would be more useful to change to access:conditional=no @ (20:00-07:00) on the relevant highway= inside, and keep only other opening_hours= on the =cemetery .
1 Like
I didn’t see a definition in the spec, so I’m just using a approximation to the equinoxes which I’m using as the start point of each season.
Fair point — I suppose I could just comment the season.
Good idea to add!
Apparently, seasons are defined as synonyms now. They are considered “mistakes”. Should not be used yet.
- Support missing seasons (spring, autumn) · Issue #21 · opening-hours/opening_hours.js · GitHub
- opening_hours.js/src/locales/word_error_correction.yaml at master · opening-hours/opening_hours.js · GitHub
That being said, as a topic of discussion, their definition is different from yours. summer includes Sep . winter ends in Feb , not included in Mar . Maybe variation between countries need to be considered, especially it’s completely opposite in the Southern Hemisphere. Season detection from object position will be very complicated. They are therefore best added as months explicitly, not interpreted from seasons.
1 Like
I’d also recommend you to check it with the opening_hours evaluation tool to see if your rule gets parsed as intended (especially relevant when dealing with complex rules such as this one). Checking it there reveals that it isn’t parsed entirely as you intended since the pedestrian rule gets overwritten by any subsequent rule (compare the need to use commas over semicolons when dealing with hours which go past midnight). I made some changes which should better reflect your intention by turning it into a fallback rule (moving it last and separating it by ||).
2 Likes
Shouldn’t the access be permissive and not no since the rules explicitly tells you to get permission during the night hours?
No, this is a common misunderstanding. permissive means permitted. If case-by-case permission is needed, it should be =private .
I forgot to consider how special night visitors need to walk into it. At the same time, there’s an unclear gap during 07:00-08:00, and the longest 16:00-20:00. Will be access:conditional=private @ (20:00-07:00) + opening_hours=Mo-Fr 08:00-16:00; Sa,Su,PH 08:00-19:00; Sep-Mar Sa,Su,PH 09:00-17:00 || "Special permission" to solve both problems.
4 Likes
Wouldn’t you also still need a Mo-Su 07:00-20:00 "Pedestrians" to account for the fact that pedestrians can access it?
1 Like
Interpreting strictly, opening_hours= is about the functionality of the PoI. It should be considered on its own from roads passing through it. In the end, highway= exists separately for routing. Presumably no router will spatial-join opening_hours= of areas as access:conditional= for highway= inside. Adding it will have no effect. Keeping them separate is better.
Of course, you can consider this unexplored, but any meaning should not be assumed. There’s more necessity to add access:conditional= first. An end user looking for how to walk might not click on every area crossed anyway.
Consider a =marketplace= , on carparks, parks, roads, or other facilities. Its opening_hours= would not be seen as affecting those. If it’s up to me, I would only treat opening_hours= on physical structures as restricting accessibility, eg building= for public passageways inside. There are still more complications, eg highway= + covered=yes outdoors, meaning the logic will be very complicated.
Yeah, I might have confused it with access=permit which applies to that situation better, though given the narrow line between permit and private, it might be better to simply use private all the time instead of messing between both tags.