Web conference notes, 2021.03.11 (Joint Working Group)

Web Conference, 2021.03.11

Joint Working Group - Provider Services

#red NOTE NEW TIME TWO HOURS SOONER #red

Every other week call at 9am PT / 12pm ET / 6pm CET

Conference Call Info

#red NOTE NEW ZOOM MEETING ID/LINK/PHONE! (as of Jan 1, 2021)

Meeting ID: 841 7098 9462 - Passcode 612987
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84170989462?pwd=WTRlY25wOVhNeS8wQk1iM2QzYkQvUT09

One tap mobile: +19294362866,,84170989462#,,,,*612987# US (New York)

Dial by phone: +1 929 436 2866 (US) (Find your local number)

Attendees

Add your own name, link, and organization during call

Agenda

Main Topics

Discussion on Stops and how to move it out of beta
- Add Stops across all of MDS #554
- Create data type for Places within Stops #549
Discussion of any unresolved issues that are a priority
- Clarifying provider API: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-specification/pull/437
- Crash reporting: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-specification/issues/613
- Provider Operating date-ranges: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-specification/issues/628

Minutes

Notes and or transcript of the call with presentation, document, GitHub links and calls to action.

1. Stops - Slides

There are three main use cases for stops

For providers to communicate to agencies the features and status of their own dedicated docking/charging infrastructure in the public right of way.
- This is what is implemented now since MDS 1.0.0 in Provider
- In beta. Not in use enough yet to know how to improve it or move it out of beta.
- Examples: Docked bikeshare, scooter charing stations
For cities to communicate to providers where required or preferred parking locations are.
- Would be added to Policy via a change
- Policy handles this now so it's not an urgent necessity, but it's a little clunky/unclear.
- Examples: spray painted corrals, required parking areas, lock to hardware
For cities to communicate to providers/public the current occupancy of generic charging/docking infrastructure so they know whether to direct riders to that location or not
- Not currently in existence as far as we know. Could be a future possibility
- Examples: City owned universal charing station for multiple providers to use

Raw Notes

(MS) Are stops relevant for micro? Seems so.
(MS) Are individual places relevant? Seems so.
(EM) What benefits does this bring to micro? Which use cases relate to mobility Policy? Charging infrastructure?
(DD) Stops are important to Spin, capacity is important. Cities are asking for corrals around transit locations. Infra ownership is open question. Data ownership potentially complex. Behavior incentivization is relevant.
(MS) Preferred parking zones are used in Louisville via email + Policy API, made visible to riders through providers
(JFH) Open question of how preferred parking is represented
(AD) Would love to have more regulatory tools for docked micro. Would like to unify on MDS, currently not possible because docked bikes not covered.
(AD) What does it mean to take it out of beta? Should we define a specific set of “beta-exit use cases” and go by that?
(EM) GBFS-private has been floated as a way to provide for some of these use cases. One unified lens means that we have to scrutinize how data can be made public in a privacy-protecting way.
(JFH) Coordinating with Mobility Data to move forward. MDS intended to be a full suite of regulatory tools for both dockless and docked, without emphasizing consumer-facing.
(WH) Goal is to have MDS as the source of truth for the PRoW, including vehicle availability. Bleeds into public-facing use cases. Consider consumer-facing use-cases.
(JFH) Cities are responsible for communicating with “the public” things like Policy and Geography, but we are not trying to be a front-end on GBFS-style availability info
(WH) Make sure nouns and verbs are unified. Keep the complexity down so as to not overwhelm the operators while still serving regulatory needs. Stay grounded in well-defined use cases.
(JFH) How can cities get Stop utilization? Derived from MDS event streams? Or separate feed from Providers? (Current design is to get a feed from Providers)
(MS) Cities do not have a mechanism for aggregating Stop data in cases where more than one Provider has access. Do Stops need to be single-Provider? (Currently, yes)
(EM) How are Stops defined physically? Mechanical docks? Paint? Fence? What sensor(s) are used to perform counts?
(JFH) Most docked bikeshare systems have mechanical docks. Providers can provide utilization data. Dockless requires (e.g.) GPS geofence testing or other sensors (RFID, machine vision, pucks in pavement). Generally this puts the responsibility on the Providers, not the Agencies.
(MS) MDS 1.0 has stop_id info in trips
(MV) Operators decide on capacity; accurate measurement is hard
(JFH) What do you want in SF, Alex?
(AD) Need to investigate SF’s regulatory ability; has Lyft implemented enough of 1.0 to have any feedback, or provide data?
(JFH) Chicago and New York are both using MDS for bikeshare
(WH) Lyft does not provide (yet) dock info in PDX
(JFH) We can reach out to NY and CHI
(AD) Same :) Will the “State of MDS Survey” going to inform?
(JFH) Not particularly, but we can get prerequisite version info. We should have an implementation requirement to move out of beta.