Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

27. May 2018 15:13 by pla16...@gmail.com :


> most importantly, opening_hours:complex=yes.
>




You joke, but one of tags that I invented this week is access:conditional = 
complex




I did it with parking marked with this beautiful sign:




https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skomplikowane_zasady_parkowania_w_Krakowie.jpg
 





"applies from Monday to Friday in time range 10:00-20:00.

Applies only to vehicles without parking permit in area P4 


and without permission from ZIKiT for residents registered in P4 parking zone"




https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/426243787#map=19/50.05520/19.95364 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> 23. May 2018 01:18 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
>
> So you propose opening_hours:unsigned=yes?
>

We can expand upon this.  We can have opening_hours:positive=yes,
opening_hours:negative=yes,
opening_hours:integer=yes, opening_hours:real=yes and, most importantly,
opening_hours:complex=yes.

:)

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

23. May 2018 01:18 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com 
:


> Le 23. 05. 18 à 01:03, Warin a écrit :
>> On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno
>>>  
>>> >>   
>>>
>>>
>>> All comments are welcomed!
>
> the same as before :) unsigned key already exist and are in use by 
> several app. what the added value to have another key (unsigned <> sign) 
> for the same kind of feature ?




So you propose opening_hours:unsigned=yes?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mark Wagner]

On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:23:43 +1000
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Most websites have some copyright thing .. that makes some nervous.
> I usually only tag things that interest me, and stuff I like to
> support.

In the United States, at least, opening hours are uncopyrightable.  You
can only copyright creative expression, not facts, and "Joe's
Barbershop is open 9 to 5 on weekdays" is about as "fact" as you can
get.

-- 
Mark

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

23. May 2018 22:10 by graemefi...@gmail.com :


> I've been wondering about this apparent dilemma & whether I've been doing the 
> wrong thing?




Surveying allows me to verify whatever feature is present at all (in around 1/4 
to 1/2 cases it is not),

I can check location (many maps.me edits are helpful but require tuning - 
restaurants in the middle of street instead on building 


where restaurant really is),

or also is done as lowest priority task,

after processing notes, fixme tags and

adding more useful info.




Also, I like going around the city on the walk,

andI should move more - and I am happy 


to solve some StreetComplete quests as i pass by something.





List of things that I want/should do at 


computer is so long that copying

opening hours from website is behind

hundreds of TODO waiting in the queue.




Overall: both methods are ok and one is free to prefer one or another.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:23 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 24/05/18 08:26, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> [Getting opening hours from websites]

>
> Most websites have some copyright thing .. that makes some nervous.
> I usually only tag things that interest me, and stuff I like to support.
>

In countries which are signatories to the Berne Convention (which is most
of them),
copyright applies AUTOMATICALLY to any creative work, whether that
copyright is
asserted or not.  Websites often assert copyright and signs showing opening
hours
usually do not, but they both ARE copyright.  AUTOMATICALLY.

Would a copyright claim over opening hours (however the info was obtained)
be upheld?  Very unlikely.

1) Telephone companies have lost claims against people who produced DVDs
of their phone books (by having lots of people keyboard the information).
The
same goes for tide tables and bus timetables.  The info was deemed
insufficiently creative.

2) The shop isn't making money by selling copies of the opening hours so
putting those hours into OSM is not depriving them of income.

Would a copyright claim even be asserted?

1) It's in the company's interest to have their opening hours known to
potential customers.

2) It would be expensive to mount a claim, and the claim would be unlikely
to succeed.

If you really are worried about getting opening hours from a website
then you should be just as worried about getting it from a sign.  Either
way you should ask the owner for permission because the risk is the
same either way.

Note: IANAL.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Warin]

On 24/05/18 08:26, Paul Allen wrote:



On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:



If I drive / walk past & see Papa Luigi's Pizza Shop, with no
other info visible, I go home, search for Papa Luigi's in this
suburb, & get their website, which gives you their phone number,
opening hours, takeaway / delivery etc. If I'm feeling
particularly enthusiastic :-), it will usually also tell me how
many tables, indoor / outdoor & so on.


I tend to do it that way too.  It's time consuming to write down the 
opening hours.  Getting close enough for a
readable photo makes people wondering why you're taking pictures of 
the people inside.  And I usually have
to google to find out if there's a website to tag (mostly there is) so 
it's a lot easier to also get opening
hours that way.   Sometimes they don't put opening hours on the web 
site but  these days they usually do.
It's also often an easy way to get the phone number (not always on 
display) and sometimes even the
number for the address (around here identifying one's house or 
business with a house name or number

on the building itself seems optional).

Isn't this the simplest way of finding missing info?


That's what I thought.  But apparently some people don't like doing it 
that way or think it's more work.


Most websites have some copyright thing .. that makes some nervous.
I usually only tag things that interest me, and stuff I like to support.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> If I drive / walk past & see Papa Luigi's Pizza Shop, with no other info
> visible, I go home, search for Papa Luigi's in this suburb, & get their
> website, which gives you their phone number, opening hours, takeaway /
> delivery etc. If I'm feeling particularly enthusiastic :-), it will usually
> also tell me how many tables, indoor / outdoor & so on.
>

I tend to do it that way too.  It's time consuming to write down the
opening hours.  Getting close enough for a
readable photo makes people wondering why you're taking pictures of the
people inside.  And I usually have
to google to find out if there's a website to tag (mostly there is) so it's
a lot easier to also get opening
hours that way.   Sometimes they don't put opening hours on the web site
but  these days they usually do.
It's also often an easy way to get the phone number (not always on display)
and sometimes even the
number for the address (around here identifying one's house or business
with a house name or number
on the building itself seems optional).


> Isn't this the simplest way of finding missing info?
>

That's what I thought.  But apparently some people don't like doing it that
way or think it's more work.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

I've been wondering about this apparent dilemma & whether I've been doing
the wrong thing?

If I drive / walk past & see Papa Luigi's Pizza Shop, with no other info
visible, I go home, search for Papa Luigi's in this suburb, & get their
website, which gives you their phone number, opening hours, takeaway /
delivery etc. If I'm feeling particularly enthusiastic :-), it will usually
also tell me how many tables, indoor / outdoor & so on.

Isn't this the simplest way of finding missing info?

Or have I been doing the "wrong" thing? :-(


Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

My entire motivation for making this tag is to record this data
>
> in machine-readable form. I want  to make my detector of things to survey
> to stop suggesting opening hours that are not worth surveying.
>

My thoughts about this keep evolving.  At the moment it seems to me that
your reason for wanting to do it is
actually a good reason not to do it.

My first thought was that a note is adequate.

My second thought was that being able to use something like overpass-turbo
to detect shops that need to
be resurveyed is a good thing.

My final (so far) thought is that it will cause more problems than it
fixes.  Somebody, perhaps you,
surveyed the place and didn't see a sign, so used this tag.  At some future
point somebody, perhaps
you again, runs a query to see which shops need to be resurveyed.  This
particular shop doesn't
need to be resurveyed because it doesn't have a sign.  The problem is that
your idea makes the
assumption that the shop will NEVER have a sign, so may never get
resurveyed.  A sign
could have been put up five minutes after the first survey.

Some shops in my town (it's not a big town) start up and fail after a
couple of years (sometimes after
only a couple of months), so I have to keep re-surveying anyway.  Shops
change their opening
hours, occasionally.

I don't see a need for this new tag.  Leaving the opening hours unspecified
seems perfectly adequate.

Oh, I misunderstood your reason.  You want a special tag invented solely
for the purpose of
making your app stop complaining about lack of opening hours.  I'm not
convinced about that
being either necessary or a good idea.  Things change.  If you're
resurveying an area anyway
then it's worth checking the opening hours because they may have changed,
or a sign may
have been put up, or the business may have gone bankrupt and a new business
is there, or...

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-23 8:25 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny :

> My entire motivation for making this tag is to record this data
>
> in machine-readable form. I want  to make my detector of things to survey
> to stop suggesting opening hours that are not worth surveying.
>


in absence of a sign you might ask the owner or staff. Let's encourage this.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

23. May 2018 05:41 by osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au 
:

> Instead of making that specific about opening_hours, I would suggest we 
> establish one of the following pattern:




I prefer to keep my proposal focused just to one specific tag, 


but I would not be opposed to somebody making a generic proposal.




I would prefer :sign=yes/no scheme as simpler.





>  known to be out of date and not matching the real situation




I admit that I never encountered something like that. I would just use note 
field.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

23. May 2018 07:15 by 61sundow...@gmail.com :


> > On 23/05/18 16:25, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:
> > 
>> 
>>   
>>   
>>   22. May 2018 23:03 by >> 61sundow...@gmail.com 
>> >> :
>>   
>>   
>>> On 23/05/1807:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno
  
 
   
   All comments are welcomed!
>>> 
>>> Could not this information be included in the note tag?
>>   
>> My entire motivation for making this tag is to record this data
>>   
>>  in machine-readable form. I want  to make my detector ofthings to 
>> survey to stop suggesting opening hours that are notworth surveying.
>>   
>>
>>   
>>   
>> Proposal page links to already implemented and used code.
>>   
>>
>>   
>>   
>> It would be impossible with note field,
>>   
>> without forcing all mappers to use 
>>   
>>   
>> specific phrase to record it (in one language across theworld),
>>   
>> what is undesirable.
>> 
> Ok, that is a fine reason. Might want to make that clear on the
> proposal page?  

 

I added more explicit note why new tag is preferred over note. 





> What about similar tags for missing address signs? 

 

If one needs it something similar may be also used.

addr:housenumber:sign=no? addr:sign = no? 


But I would leave it for somebody who needs this tag.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Warin]

On 23/05/18 16:25, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:




22. May 2018 23:03 by 61sundow...@gmail.com 
:


On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno

All comments are welcomed!


Could not this information be included in the note tag?

My entire motivation for making this tag is to record this data

in machine-readable form. I want  to make my detector of things to 
survey to stop suggesting opening hours that are not worth surveying.



Proposal page links to already implemented and used code.


It would be impossible with note field,

without forcing all mappers to use

specific phrase to record it (in one language across the world),

what is undesirable.

Ok, that is a fine reason. Might want to make that clear on the proposal 
page?


What about similar tags for missing address signs?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Mateusz Konieczny]

22. May 2018 23:03 by 61sundow...@gmail.com :


> On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno
>>  
>> 
>>
>> All comments are welcomed!
>
> Could not this information be included in the note tag?

My entire motivation for making this tag is to record this data

 in machine-readable form. I want  to make my detector of things to survey to 
stop suggesting opening hours that are not worth surveying.




Proposal page links to already implemented and used code.




It would be impossible with note field,

without forcing all mappers to use 


specific phrase to record it (in one language across the world),

what is undesirable.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[osm.tagging]

> -Original Message-
> From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 23 May 2018 09:31

> >> Could not this information be included in the note tag?
> > note is free text for mapper
> > unsigned is also used by tools like http://qa.poole.ch/
> 
> I don't think any data consumer will use this information, so it is
> for the mapper .. so that fits in the note key. If may not be easy
> to automate it, but is that required?

A tool could make recommendations about what to survey, which might point out 
business that don't have an opening_hours tag.

If there is an easily automatable tag indicating that the opening_hours are not 
signed at the premises, the tool could either not recommend that location for a 
survey or specifically list that opening hours might have to be looked up 
online or inquired about in some other way.

So I'm in agreement that it's worthwhile to tag this information in a fixed 
way, not using the note tag for it.

Instead of making that specific about opening_hours, I would suggest we 
establish one of the following pattern:

:sign=yes/no/disused
(disused = sign is present but unreadable or known to be out of date and not 
matching the real situation)

or:

unsigned:=yes/no
(disused would sound wrong in this context, though I would like to be able to 
map that information in some way)

There are other tags (like source) that already follow the 2nd pattern. On the 
other hand, the first pattern keeps the information that should stay together 
better in one place when looking at a sorted list of tags.

I might be worthwhile to also consider how this would interact with 
last_checked (not that commonly used, but probably useful in combination with 
this tag):

:sign:last_checked=
last_checked::sign=

unsigned::last_checked=
last_checked:unsigned:=

Personally I would prefer the first over the last choice, and the middle two 
just look wrong.

Cheers,
Thorsten



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Warin]

On 23/05/18 09:18, marc marc wrote:


Le 23. 05. 18 à 01:03, Warin a écrit :

On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno


All comments are welcomed!

the same as before :) unsigned key already exist and are in use by
several app. what the added value to have another key (unsigned <> sign)
for the same kind of feature ?


That key is for names .. not hours ... possible unsigned:opening_hours=yes 
would be applicable, and can be further applied to anything else?




Could not this information be included in the note tag?

note is free text for mapper
unsigned is also used by tools like http://qa.poole.ch/


I don't think any data consumer will use this information, so it is for the 
mapper .. so that fits in the note key. If may not be easy to automate it, but 
is that required?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[marc marc]

Le 23. 05. 18 à 01:03, Warin a écrit :
> On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno
>>  
>>
>>
>> All comments are welcomed!

the same as before :) unsigned key already exist and are in use by 
several app. what the added value to have another key (unsigned <> sign) 
for the same kind of feature ?

> Could not this information be included in the note tag?

note is free text for mapper
unsigned is also used by tools like http://qa.poole.ch/

Regards,
Marc
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

[Warin]

On 23/05/18 07:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/opening_hours:sign%3Dno

All comments are welcomed!


Could not this information be included in the note tag?
The pages says this is a 'typical reason' .. that hints that there are 
other reasons .. so those other reasons could also be stated in a note 
rather than proliferate yet more tags?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging