implementing MODES OF OPERATION from FU 44

[ue71603]

Additionally, The association from NAVIGATION PATH to ACCESS MODE should be removed and replaced with an association between NAVIGATION PATH and PERSONAL MODE.

Maybe: NAVIGATION PATH --> traversable by --> PERSONAL MODE PERSONAL MODE --> suitable for --> NAVIGATION PATH

Current state of affairs

List in Transmodel dynamicCarPooling longDistanceCarPooling stationlessVehicleSharing peerToPeerCarSharing taxicab sharedTaxi commercialCarSharing carSharingClub cycleSharing chauffeuredCar taxi

netex_modeOfOperation_support

Modes of Operation: scheduled flexible alternative vehicleRental vehicleSharing vehiclePooling personal other

Enums of SubModesOfOperation:

flexible

        <xsd:enumeration value="flexibleArea"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="demandResponsive"/>

rental:

        <xsd:enumeration value="vehicleLease"/>

sharing:

        <xsd:enumeration value="peerToPeerCarSharing"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="vehicleSharing"/>

pooling

        <xsd:enumeration value="appBookedTaxi"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="sharedTaxi"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="prebookedTaxi"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="chaffeuredVehicle"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="dynamicCarPooling"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="longDistanceCarPooling"/>

personal

        <xsd:enumeration value="ownCar"/>
        <xsd:enumeration value="privateLift"/>

scheduled

        <xsd:enumeration value="eventBasedService"/>

[ue71603]

Things we don't want to do are now in: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/issues/380

[ue71603]

@trurlurl @herlitze @normanoffel @Aurige : What we need to do next week:

• Check that we added the things from Transmodel FU44 to the definitions in OJP. Christophe/Matthias
• Make clear that we will only have SITE ELEMENTS in TimedLegs => area based door-2-door demand responsive buses are ContinuousLegs
• Cleanup the enums (I think they are currently not clear cut)

[ue71603]

MODE_OF_OPERATION.xlsx @skinkie @herlitze @normanoffel @Aurige @sgrossberndt @trurlurl I tried to map MODE OF OPERATION, MODE and all the rest into one consistent picture:

• We keep TimedLeg, TransferLeg, ContinuousLeg
• We have a ModeOfOperation (which bases on xxxService currently). There are many and they may affect, which MODE / SUBMODE can then be used. But we don't explicitly model that.
• I suggest we remove the current different types of xxxModeOfOperation for TimedLeg (Service covers this just fine)
• As TransferLeg has no Service I will have to tweak TransferMode (there are some strange modes in there), ContinousMode will be integrated in the TransferMode. I think TransferModeOfOperation is not needed explicitly.
• and ContinuousLeg, if possible and only keep it for the TransferlegI suggest we remove the current different types of xxxModeOfOperation for TimedLeg and ContinuousLeg, if possible and only keep it for the Transferleg
• In the ConinuousServiceStructure, I will have to twak things: ContinousMode/IndividualMode will be merged. ModeOfOperation needs to be added and how to handle the DatedVehicleJourney vs SharingService will need to be checked

Can you pls check quickly and give me your input on that part?

[trurlurl]

Can you pls check quickly and give me your input on that part?

The plan sounds good to me, as far as I understand it:

• TimedLeg would have no xxxModes. From TimedModes, flexibleArea would move to ContinuousModes, I think.
• TransferLeg would have TransferModes, perhaps complemented with items from ContinuousModes (would car or motorcycle make sense, or would such a motorised transfer be modelled as ContinuousLeg?)
• ContinuousLeg would have ContinuousModes that includes flexibleArea and items from IndividualModes. And an additional ContinuousModeOfOperation or similar.

[ue71603]

Can you pls check quickly and give me your input on that part?

The plan sounds good to me, as far as I understand it:

• TimedLeg would have no xxxModes. From TimedModes, flexibleArea would move to ContinuousModes, I think.
• TransferLeg would have TransferModes, perhaps complemented with items from ContinuousModes (would car or motorcycle make sense, or would such a motorised transfer be modelled as ContinuousLeg?)
• ContinuousLeg would have ContinuousModes that includes flexibleArea and items from IndividualModes. And an additional ContinuousModeOfOperation or similar.

Yes, that's about it.

[ue71603]

@skinkie @Aurige ready to have a look at it from the TM perspective

OJP will implement the following MODE OF OPERATION. The hierarchy is not explicitly modeled. However, always the most specialised MODE OF OPERATION is to be used.

Conventional (ConventionalModesOfOperationEnumeration in TimedLeg)

• scheduled
• demandResponsive
  • flexibleRoute
  • flexibleArea
• shuttle
• pooling (when a timetable exists and SCHEDULED STOP POINTs exist)
• replacement
• pRM (shuttles that are used instead of regular buses, when special needs warrant it)

Personal (PersonalModesOfOperationEnumeration in ContinuousLeg)

• self (= walking)
• own
• lease
• hire
• other

Alternative (AlternativeModesOfOperation in ContinuousLeg)

• sharing
  • stationLessSharing
  • stationBasedSharing
  • peerToPeerSharing
  • parkAndRideSharing
  • sharingClubSharing
• pRM (when the operation is not based on SCHEDULED STOP POINTS) pooling
  • taxi
  • shuttle
  • dynamicPooling
  • longDistancePooling
  • commuterPooling
  • parkAndRidePooling
  • chauffeured
• demandResponsive (flexible areas without stops)
  • flexibleArea
• other

OJP currently uses TransferModesEnumeration. However, given the values and the reason that MODE and TYPE are convoluted. We will use TransferType and

Values:

• walk
• shuttle
• taxi
• protectedConnection
• guaranteedConnection
• remainInVehicle
• changeWithinVehicle
• checkIn
• checkOut
• parkAndRide
• bikeAndRide
• carHire
• bikeHire
• other

and I had to create an

IndividalModeEnumeration

[ue71603]

MODE_OF_OPERATION.xlsx

[ue71603]

Updated the Excel. One column was misleading. MODE_OF_OPERATION.xlsx

[Aurige]

@skinkie @Aurige ready to have a look at it from the TM perspective

Looks ok for me (I didn't went through a detailed review of all XSD changes, but it looks fine).

[herlitze]

Updated the Excel. One column was misleading. MODE_OF_OPERATION.xlsx

The table shows the mapping of Transmodel to OJP, correct? I think a table mapping the current OJP modes to the new ones would be helpful. E. g. we added ride-pool-car, car-sharing, cycle-sharing, scooter-sharing, park-ride-car to the individualModes. These are now modelled as ContinuosLeg with Service.IndividualMode=car/cycle/scooter and Service.AlternativeModeOfOperation=sharing/pooling

[trurlurl]

Where is the former distinction between self-drive car, others-drive, park-and-ride made - at least as far as it is necessary to know whether a parking space is needed or not?

[ue71603]

Where is the former distinction between self-drive car, others-drive, park-and-ride made - at least as far as it is necessary to know whether a parking space is needed or not?

@trurlurl This is in

• the xxxModeOfOperation for self-drive others-drive in Service PersonalModeOfOperation / AlternativeModeOfOperation
• indicating park-and-ride is in the TransferTypeEnumeration and so it is part of the TransferLeg
• We are currently lacking ParkingFacility in StopServiceStatusGroup/Attribute (part of https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/406 ). II will add it there.

[trurlurl]

Where is the former distinction between self-drive car, others-drive, park-and-ride made - at least as far as it is necessary to know whether a parking space is needed or not?

@trurlurl This is in

* the xxxModeOfOperation for self-drive others-drive in Service  PersonalModeOfOperation / AlternativeModeOfOperation

* indicating park-and-ride  is in the TransferTypeEnumeration and so it is part of the TransferLeg

* We are currently lacking ParkingFacility in StopServiceStatusGroup/Attribute (part of [Added Attributes to LegBoard, LegAligt und LegIntermediate #406](https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/406) ). II will add it there.

@ue71603 Do you mean by that that self-drive and others-drive are in PersonalModeOfOperation? There is "self" (=self-drive), but otherwise only "own", "other-owned", etc. (nothing indicating a pick-up or drop-off scenario). (BTW: are the ownership relations needed?)

And I don't understand why parkAndRide is on the TransferLeg. I would expect parkAndRide vs. pick-up/drop-off to be labelled on a ContinuousLeg (in PersonalModeOfOperation).

[ue71603]

@trurlurl

Do you mean by that that self-drive and others-drive are in PersonalModeOfOperation? There is "self" (=self-drive), but otherwise only "own", "other-owned", etc. (nothing indicating a pick-up or drop-off scenario). (BTW: are the ownership relations needed?)

No: other drive etc is always an AlternativeModeOfOperation. PersonalModeOfOperation is always yourself in your vehicle.

And I don't understand why parkAndRide is on the TransferLeg. I would expect parkAndRide vs. pick-up/drop-off to be labelled on a ContinuousLeg (in PersonalModeOfOperation).

The park and ride happens in my opinion:

• ContinuousLeg you do with your car to the parking
• TransferLeg between the parking and the public transport (or between the ContinuousLeg with the car and a different ContinuousLeg with "foot" as MODE.
• TimedLeg public transport. The TransferLeg then accounts for the time that is needed to navigate the PARKING and get to the track where the train will depart.

Other opinions to model this?

[herlitze]

@ue71603 I have the following remarks:

• To what extent must the change also be taken into account for the PtModeFilter in the TripRequest?
• To what extent does this apply to the ITModeToCover? For example, how is a sharing ride requested?
• TransferType is not clear to me yet, parkandRide/bikeandRide are for me e.g. no means of transport I can use when transferring

[ue71603]

@ue71603 I have the following remarks:

• To what extent must the change also be taken into account for the PtModeFilter in the TripRequest?
• To what extent does this apply to the ITModeToCover? For example, how is a sharing ride requested?
• TransferType is not clear to me yet, parkandRide/bikeandRide are for me e.g. no means of transport I can use when transferring

1. ptModeFilter. You are right. We need an update there as well. Is fixed in this commit here: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/379/commits/5d4251968a914bb364fbc6aa04f002f67f38c757
2. ITModeToCover: This includes all PersonalMode currently. So sharing could not be requested. I rebuild ItModeToCover with a Mode/ModeOfOperation combination, then it should work. See commit: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/379/commits/820156513eb6caa988d38f3cbe5a566df17b313f (examples had to be fixed afterwards, too)
3. Even when TransferType was not fully added that way by me, I expand now the definitions. Pls check, if this makes sense @herlitze @Aurige @trurlurl Done in this commit: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/379/commits/b0a669c1c55df3a57f6e148ae878a85db2b7f8df

[ue71603]

André noted (and I think that Malte also goes in this direction). How do I specify, that I need park and ride. This now can be done `

car

                    <MaxDistance>240</MaxDistance>
                    <MaxDuration>PT20M</MaxDuration>
                    <MinDistance>100</MinDistance>
                    <MinDuration>PT1M</MinDuration>
                    <Speed>150</Speed>
                    <AdditionalTime>PT3M</AdditionalTime>
                </IndividualTransportOptions>

` makes sure that the first leg is car and P&R should be considered. It is not forced as on street parking might be possible. Do you want an additional boolean to force P&R. We could do this by adding an additional value to either personal mode or something else like that.

In the destination `

car

                        <AlternativeModeOfOperation>parkAndRideSharing</AlternativeModeOfOperation>
                    </ItModeAndModeOfOperation>`

would do the trick.

But for what André wanted in the first example `

foot

                </IndividualTransportOptions>
                <IndividualTransportOptions>
                    <ItModeAndModeOfOperation>
                        <PersonalMode>car</PersonalMode>
                        <AlternativeModeOfOperation>taxi</AlternativeModeOfOperation>
                    </ItModeAndModeOfOperation>
                </IndividualTransportOptions>   `

commit: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/379/commits/1f59c57b4c94b9153fde75b5e68a7ea9a5906e8b

[ue71603]

The second example André wanted was

• first leg car & no parking (because other person brought him) or walk
• last leg cycle + parking (Stop Place already known) commit: https://github.com/VDVde/OJP/pull/379/commits/0e7face5e00a0253590d137a68bb524b2eac56a1

[ue71603]

Mapping OJP 1.0 modes to OJP 2.0 MODE_mapping.xlsx

[ue71603]

@Aurige privateLift seems ok to the native English speakers. They also want it in AlternativeMode. What do you think? Move it back there? And then it is usage of a different driver that is the main criterion to have something in Alternative and not in Personal.