Defining Overlapping Policies for Distinct Activity Types

[lummish]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

We are having trouble defining a policy which overlaps in time and user classes with another policy, but specifies regulations for a different activity type.

For a representative example, consider the following situation:

Regulation A: There is a loading zone which has normal operating hours between 09:00 and 17:00. In this zone, we allow all types of vehicle to park during the specified hours.

Regulation B: We would like to define a 24-hour policy for this zone which specifies that vehicles cannot stop in the travel lane along the zone (i.e. vehicles are not allowed to double park). This regulation applies to all classes of vehicle.

Currently, it does not seem possible to specify both Regulation A and Regulation B as separate policies because, though the policies specify regulations regarding different activities (parking vs. travel), they do not do so using disjoint user classes.

Describe the solution you'd like

Modify the specification to allow policies with overlapping time spans to be defined with equal priorities on the same zone if they specify disjoint user classes or disjoint activities.

Is this a breaking change

The only potential breaking change that this proposal would introduce would be with respect to policy validation logic, as policies which would previously have been considered as conflicting, would not necessarily be conflicting.

Impacted Spec

For which spec is this feature being requested?

• Curbs

Describe alternatives you've considered

• We considered defining the travel lane as a separate zone which would allow specification of a separate policy, however a standard travel lane does not meet the criteria specified for being a zone.
• We considered allowing conflicting activity definitions for rules within an individual policy, however this does not accommodate regulations which have distinct time spans.

cc: @michaelautomotus