Release 1.2.0 Checkpoint Midway
The City and Provider Working Group Steering Committees met for the Midway Checkpoint for the 1.2.0 proposed release, and presented these results at a Working Group meeting. The Checkpoint let them review feature proposals, align current work to goals, and ensure the release features and work is on track.
For this work, we have created a new rubric to help guide the evaluation, looking at feature utility, stakeholder adoption, implementation simplicity, direction consensus, and work completed as part of the evaluation criteria.
The outcomes and actions from these discussions are summarized here:
#608 - New API for an agency to describe a city’s MDS requirements digitally
Good utility and consensus on this, but not sure who will commit to adopting it yet, and the administrative implementation of this is mostly unknown.
Would need an effort up front from the OMF to get adoption and build tools/hosting for the new format. It won't replace paper work done now, but is a step in that direction. Good for agencies to do their homework and be clear about what parts of MDS they are requesting. Would help with discovery of what services by other agencies and providers/third parties and is good for transparency. There is a need for this but not necessarily urgency.
Actions: Get agencies/cities/providers on board to commit to using this once complete. Create an actual PR to review how this would fit into MDS.
#521 #574 - Support for new vehicles/modes/services (self-driving to rider, delivery bots)
Very good utility and adoption potential for this, as well as potential consensus on urgency and direction. Not sure of how much work is needed, how to implement, or how complex changes would be.
Actions: Create a “Community Group” to have the discussions needed, decide on a solution, and find stakeholders to commit.
#614
Seems to be useful and relatively simple to implement, but there is no work done on this yet, so the solution is unclear. Need a bit more organization interested and committed to adopting.
Actions: Could be part of new self driving modes “Community Group” discussion, and would need to involve modal operators. Needs more details and a proposal and discussion. Ensure to stay synced with GBFS.
#613 how to send crash data to agencies
This proposal needs work across the board, since currently 3 options are proposed, and there is not agreement on implementation or how it would work, within MDS or from equipment/data available from providers. Agencies certainly would like this data, but people self report and it's not real time so data is minimal. What city would use the sensor data in a meaningful way and rely on it?
Actions: Create a clear proposal based on discussions and see if it's possible and orgs can commit to it.
Multiple additions to Policy that could support more digitization of city permit policy requirements
Good agreement that these proposals would be useful and would be adopted by those using Policy. Examples may solve some of these, and for the others there are no concrete proposals yet.
Actions: Work with the community to ensure which examples could solve some of the issues and be included in MDS documentation. For others, create concrete proposals of how MDS can be changed to support them.
Gather feedback, move out of beta. MDS Survey: about half of agencies are using Vehicles, most providers are, and almost all companies support it. Seems to have good real world usage.
Actions: Created an issue (#637) and now ask everyone what feedback they all have.
Gather feedback, move out of beta. MDS Survey: about a third of agencies are using Stops, almost no providers are, and most companies support it. Moderate usage, but companies are supporting it well.
Actions: Created an issue (#638), and now ask companies which cities/providers are using stops, see what feedback they all have.
