Type of request
Is your feature request related to a problem?
If so, please describe the problem. For example: with the current specification I cannot model [...]. Or: I'm unable to
provide the use case [...].
Currently startDateTimeConstraint and endtDateTimeConstraint use different fields to indicate the time of the constraint (startDateTime and endDateTime respectively). This makes the implementation harder without any clear benefit, whereas the type is really the only difference.
Describe the solution you'd like
What would you like to add or change to the specification? Please be as clear and concise as possible.
Add a time field on both type of constraints and deprecate the separate fields. This make it simpler and more consistent with each other.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Did you try to solve it with the current specification? If so, how? Please be as clear and concise as possible.
You could keep it as is, since fundamentally it does not change what can be expressed, the proposal is just to make it simpler and more consistent.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
Type of request
Is your feature request related to a problem?
If so, please describe the problem. For example: with the current specification I cannot model [...]. Or: I'm unable to
provide the use case [...].
Currently
startDateTimeConstraintandendtDateTimeConstraintuse different fields to indicate the time of the constraint (startDateTimeandendDateTimerespectively). This makes the implementation harder without any clear benefit, whereas the type is really the only difference.Describe the solution you'd like
What would you like to add or change to the specification? Please be as clear and concise as possible.
Add a
timefield on both type of constraints and deprecate the separate fields. This make it simpler and more consistent with each other.Describe alternatives you've considered
Did you try to solve it with the current specification? If so, how? Please be as clear and concise as possible.
You could keep it as is, since fundamentally it does not change what can be expressed, the proposal is just to make it simpler and more consistent.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.