Add more offices to wheelchair, opening_hours and shop expression

[dbdean]

Added a few more office options to the Opening Hours and Wheelchair quests. Also added some that seemed appropriate to the isShopExpressionFilter function too.

The following were added because they had more than 10K instances from taginfo, and had decent current usage of opening_hours:

• estate_agent (was already in wheelchair and shop expression)
• lawyer (was already in wheelchair)
• telecommunication
• educational_institution
• association
• ngo
• it
• accountant

I only included telecommunication, it, lawyer and accountant in the shop expression, as the others seemed less likely to be present in usual retail environments.

There was no need to change the PlaceName quests as all offices are already included.

[FloEdelmann]

I think many places with office=it are not customer-facing "shop"s, but rather, well, the offices of software companies. So asking for opening hours and wheelchair access may lead to many "can't answer" notes there.

I think office=estate_agent, office=lawyer, office=accountant are fine; I can't really tell for the others.

[westnordost]

See @FloEdelmann , certain office=* are not not in the list because there haven't been tagged enough of them but because they are not "walk in". Anything that is not (highly likely) walk in should not be in these quests.

[dbdean]

Absolutely, @FloEdelmann. Sorry if it wasn't clear that I had taken that into account.

The only ones I personally wanted was estate_agent, lawyer and accountant, but I wanted to make sure that I was a bit more consistent in gauging what walk-in places were from how things are actually mapped, rather than my perceptions.

I did this a bit haphazardly before, but I've taken the time to look up each of the existing and my proposed new quests using taginfo, to see if we can determine how people are tagging these type of offices in the wild already:

office=	existing osm quests	count	opening_hours	wheelchair
telecommunications	none	29,480	38%	n/a
insurance	opening_hours, wheelchair	51,480	27%	7%
diplomatic	opening_hours, wheelchair	14,896	21%	n/a
employment_agency	opening_hours, wheelchair	10,396	20%	n/a
it	none	13,602	20%	n/a
lawyer	wheelchair	32,227	15%	6%
estate_agent	wheelchair	61,974	14%	6%
ngo	none	18,210	14%	n/a
association	none	20,656	11%	6%
government	opening_hours, wheelchair	204,648	11%	3%
accountant	none	10,593	10%	n/a
educational_institution	none	27,343	8%	n/a
religion	opening_hours, wheelchair	10,113	n/a	n/a
tax_advisor	opening_hours, wheelchair	7,392	n/a	n/a
political_party	wheelchair	5,344	n/a	n/a
travel_agent	opening_hours, wheelchair	4,054	n/a	n/a
therapist	wheelchair	2,699	n/a	n/a

I've sorted the table by existing proportion of items that already have opening_hours. n/a means that taginfo didn't have the number, which I believe means only a small number of examples (or none) exist.

I believe all of my proposed additions fit in well with the current usage out in the wild, at least as far as opening_hours go, but I am certainly open to compromising. I could see removing educational_institution for example. As I know that there are plenty of accountants around that have opening hours, I wouldn't want to remove anything that has an existing high level of usage than them, though.

Wheelchair usage is a bit harder to gauge, I'd certainly be happy to move some of these to opening_hours but not wheelchair, if it would help get this PR passed.

[mnalis]

I think many places with office=it are not customer-facing "shop"s, but rather, well, the offices of software companies. So asking for opening hours and wheelchair access may lead to many "can't answer" notes there.

True. It may be good idea for marking them with access=private if they are not "walk in" (assuming the quests would ignore offices marked private; as they should). Perhaps as Other answers option like "Can't say, it is private"?

@dbdean if changes to isShopExpressionFragment() get merged, please follow instructions in comment above it and open an issue/PR at https://github.com/mnalis/StreetComplete-taginfo-categorize so I can add them before next update run of it. (I'll try to spot / remember, but it's easy to miss for me in midst of all notifications)

[dbdean]

@mnalis, on the 'Can't say - is private' option, see #2051.

[westnordost]

I have not been replying further so far because 1. not sure if Flo will guide this or not and 2. more importantly, I reckon we need some kind of clear criteria when to include shop types that maybe are walk-in and maybe not. Because recently, leisure=horse_riding was removed from the list by @matkoniecz following #3978 because too few such amenities are walk-in like that (i.e. have publicly posted opening hours).
If there is no clear criteria, it will be a neverending tug of war between people who want the question to be asked for more amenities and for people who want it to be asked for less amenities, with us maintainers in the middle.

Any ideas for that?

[matkoniecz]

leisure=horse_riding was removed from the list by @matkoniecz following #3978 because too few such amenities are walk-in like that (i.e. have publicly posted opening hours).

It was even in worse situation: it may have multiple separate opening hours (different for walk ins, different for signed up customers, different for arranging use, different for people with arranged meeting). And different objects will have different ones posted)

#1423 was a similar case

[dbdean]

I'm not really sure if we can have any hard and fast rules - a lot of it is going to come down to what SC mappers perceive as needed and/or too spammy.

I do think we should always try to base our choices on what is already mapped in OSM though. If a decent proportion of a particular shop/office/amenity already have opening hours then we should be ok with asking them. You can always answer that there is no sign after all. What would that number be? 10%? I'm not really sure.

As for wheelchair usage, I'm even less sure. I kind of think that if something can have opening hours, then it can probably be determined if it is wheelchair accessible too, but there are certainly some places that you don't feel comfortable enough in getting close enough to a business you aren't actually using to determine if they are wheelchair accessible or not.

[dbdean]

Oh, and one of the main reasons I want opening hours is to be given the option to be asked regularly if these shops/offices/amenities still exist. So one solution might be to put some of these items on a 'does X still exist' list even if asking for opening hours isn't really needed. I think hotels, motels and BnBs would be good for that - they don't really have opening hours, but I would like to be asked if they are still operating every so often.

[dbdean]

@FloEdelmann, when you are able, can I get an indication of what changes you would like to be made to get this PR in?

As I said, I am happy to compromise on which types of offices get included, but I would like to base the decision on actual usage data from taginfo, rather than our perceptions of what does and does not have opening hours.

[FloEdelmann]

Thanks @dbdean for looking at Taginfo and summarizing the results in a table! That certainly looks like tagging opening_hours to office=it is way more common than I thought.

There might be one missing information: How many elements with office=it that have real opening hours are already tagged with opening_hours? That percentage might be quite high already (making the quest for the rest of them quite spammy with "has no opening hours") or it might be a rather uniform distribution (making the quest useful).

I think it makes sense to assume a uniform distribution, as we can't really find out anyway. So let's go with your additions!

[FloEdelmann]

one solution might be to put some of these items on a 'does X still exist' list even if asking for opening hours isn't really needed. I think hotels, motels and BnBs would be good for that - they don't really have opening hours, but I would like to be asked if they are still operating every so often.

That wouldn't work with the current CheckExistence quest, as it will delete the node (and doesn't work for ways/areas). Maybe we could have another quest similar to CheckShopType that is asked regularly for all old shops/hotels/etc.

[matkoniecz]

That wouldn't work with the current CheckExistence quest, as it will delete the node (and doesn't work for ways/areas)

It could work for hotels and offices mapped as nodes.