Closed schnuerle closed 1 year ago
For the sake of consistency, could the mode
field on policy
also be renamed to mobility_mode
, to match what's in agency
?
For the sake of consistency, could the
mode
field onpolicy
also be renamed tomobility_mode
, to match what's inagency
?
@janedotx Where do you see mobility_mode
in Agency?
For the sake of consistency, could the
mode
field onpolicy
also be renamed tomobility_mode
, to match what's inagency
?@janedotx Where do you see
mobility_mode
in Agency?
@schnuerle I was the one that was mentioning to @janedotx about the inconsistency, but in looking into it, the reference to mobility_modes
is in the jurisdiction schema. I think her question is still valid, but the inconsistency is between policy (mode
) and jurisdiction (mobility_modes
). Also, it is referred to mode_id
in providers.csv. I think it would be nice id all of these references used the same terminology.
@drtyh2o @janedotx @marie-x I made some commits that updated these field names to mode_id
or mode_ids
across the spec. Let me know if I missed any, thanks!
@drtyh2o @janedotx @marie-x I made some commits that updated these field names to
mode_id
ormode_ids
across the spec. Let me know if I missed any, thanks!
Thanks @schnuerle ... I would have been slightly partial to mobility_mode
and mobility_modes
because that wouldn't have impacted jurisdictions
, but I am happy that they are consistent.
I am not sure if this is the right place but here I go.
Why are the parking policies not defined only by time ? With 0 as maximum it is forbidden. Stricly greater than 0 authorized and if the maximum is null, the parking time unlimited.
Summary
The Release Candidate for MDS
2.0.0
has been submitted: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-specification/releases/tag/2.0.0-rc1Please use this pull request to track Technology Council and OMF Board feedback and/or requested changes.
Action Item
This pull request will be merged by an OMF maintainer after OMF Board Approval following the Release Guidelines.