-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Routing for accessibility, without Scores #273
Conversation
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
</xs:enumeration> | ||
<xs:enumeration value="earliestArrival"> | ||
<xs:annotation> | ||
<xs:documentation>Earliest arrival time respecting the time constraints.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Earliest possible departure time, with the earliest arrival time.
|
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
@@ -210,6 +258,22 @@ | |||
</xs:choice> | |||
</xs:sequence> | |||
</xs:complexType> | |||
<xs:simpleType name="AccessibilityPreferenceEnumeration"> | |||
<xs:annotation> | |||
<xs:documentation>Allowed values for a AccessibilityPreference.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
only when routing relevant
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AccessibilityRoutingPreferenceEnumeration
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Modular interface construction should be mentioned in the documentation in general
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
check if the RepresentationGroup if the other switches are there.
Extend the xs:documentaiton
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Jona: standard interfaces with non-standard behaviour. The expectation of the backend must be in good detail in the documentation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is the most crucial point: "The expectation of the backend must be in good detail in the documentation."
Co-authored-by: Stefan de Konink <[email protected]>
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
@@ -210,6 +258,22 @@ | |||
</xs:choice> | |||
</xs:sequence> | |||
</xs:complexType> | |||
<xs:simpleType name="AccessibilityPreferenceEnumeration"> | |||
<xs:annotation> | |||
<xs:documentation>Allowed values for a AccessibilityPreference.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AccessibilityRoutingPreferenceEnumeration
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
@@ -210,6 +258,22 @@ | |||
</xs:choice> | |||
</xs:sequence> | |||
</xs:complexType> | |||
<xs:simpleType name="AccessibilityPreferenceEnumeration"> | |||
<xs:annotation> | |||
<xs:documentation>Allowed values for a AccessibilityPreference.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Modular interface construction should be mentioned in the documentation in general
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
@@ -210,6 +258,22 @@ | |||
</xs:choice> | |||
</xs:sequence> | |||
</xs:complexType> | |||
<xs:simpleType name="AccessibilityPreferenceEnumeration"> | |||
<xs:annotation> | |||
<xs:documentation>Allowed values for a AccessibilityPreference.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
check if the RepresentationGroup if the other switches are there.
Extend the xs:documentaiton
OJP/OJP_Trips.xsd
Outdated
@@ -210,6 +258,22 @@ | |||
</xs:choice> | |||
</xs:sequence> | |||
</xs:complexType> | |||
<xs:simpleType name="AccessibilityPreferenceEnumeration"> | |||
<xs:annotation> | |||
<xs:documentation>Allowed values for a AccessibilityPreference.</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Jona: standard interfaces with non-standard behaviour. The expectation of the backend must be in good detail in the documentation.
AccessibilityRoutingPreferences for a single comprehenisve OptimisationMethod for accessibility
AccessibilityRoutingPreferences are now intended to be used by a single OptimisationMethod, bestAccessibility, and allow for optimizing for mobility and other impairments. I played through a few scenarios, and the current solution now seems satisfactory (to me). Here an example of a complexer scenario: Example of a visually + mobility impaired passenger Do a search for bestAccessibility Do 2nd search for bestAccessiblity - w/o prio 4 / noRamp (to get the routes previously discarded due to the missed connections) Do a search for fastest For each route found for fastest, refine (RefinementRequest) each TransferLeg for bestAccessibility Do a search for leastWalking For each route found for leastWalking, refine (RefinementRequest) each TransferLeg for bestAccessibility Quite a number of searches (one might also want to add minChanges) - but it seems possible to get a really useful collection of routes relevant for a particular impairment profile. |
Remark about the serialization of the priorities The question was raised whether the order in which the priorities are listed is guaranteed to be preserved when serializing the xml. Doing an internet search, I didn't find this to be a known problem. Surprisingly, sequence seems to be more disputed, but should work as well: |
Failing check is due to the fact that the branch is on my separate cloned repository. I'm going to change that for future pull requests in order to avoid that problem (and others). For this PR we can leave it like that, I guess - ? |
No, this is not possible, otherwise we get ci/lint changes in the changes_for_v1.1 branch. Please create a new branch |
Removed documentation label, documentation will be done for the follow-up PR. |
This is an alternative proposal to #254, keeping BaseTripMobilityFilterGroup (almost) unchanged but nevertheless allowing for specifying low level accessibility needs and preferences.