-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 233
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
Consider representing "unauthorized" movement in reconciled state machine #527
Comments
Can we flesh out the use case for this and clarify that in the title? It reads like we're talking about policing riders. |
We will be talking about this on the Working Group call tomorrow: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-specification/wiki/Web-conference-notes,-2020.10.01-(Joint-Working-Group-City-Services) |
Hi @billdirks we talked about this at the WG meeting. Vianova said this may be needed when a device is being moved between operational zones. Alex in SF said So the consensus is that the new states and events that are available now should cover 'unauthorized' vehicle movement. While a provider knows when this happens (eg when a locked device is moved and an alarm goes off), we didn't think it needed to be returned for any city use cases. What are your thoughts on this, do you have any specific use cases, and do you think the new events cover this? |
The use case here is operational and not about policing riders. My concern was about events that move the location of unused scooters on the PROW that can't be represented by MDS. This is because we generate a map of scooter locations from playing through status events. If one is using the map to locate a scooter (eg some agencies wanted to remove scooters from the street during recent protests) sometimes it could be difficult to find because it was moved and the operator couldn't signal that through MDS. For example, a random person (ie not a rider) may pick up a scooter walk a block and then put it down. Note, when this issue was brought up the It seems like we could now represent this happening my transitioning to the We can close this ticket. |
Thanks Bill for the details and thoughts. Agree we can close this now. If anyone has feedback or would like it to be reopened for a specific use case, please let us know in a comment. |
From @billdirks on #506:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: