Skip to content
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

Discuss the influence AccessFacilities (from SIRI) in the OJP query and reply #194

Closed
skinkie opened this issue May 13, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@skinkie
Copy link
Contributor

skinkie commented May 13, 2022

The accessfacilities include information concerning station information for example. We must discuss the influence of SIRI in the OJP query and reply structures. For example step free when the escalator is broken.

@ue71603 ue71603 modified the milestones: v1.1, v2.0 Aug 9, 2022
@ue71603 ue71603 added enhancement New feature or request documentation labels Aug 9, 2022
@ue71603
Copy link
Contributor

ue71603 commented Aug 9, 2022

Stefan: SituationExchange stuff. The why (because escalator is broken is the interesting part). We should be able to show in the Transferleg that the Accessibility is broken. I always have first the static planning and then should be able to give the why.
Still send them the common reply, but tell, it is broken. Then we point to Siri.
Malte: Not only accessibility, but also realtime.
Stefan: This goes to the access facilities.
Malte: If 4 trips are requested, what is responded.
Stefan: I would get 8 responses
Malte: With blocking E.g. the next may be 5 hours later.
Klaus: There is also a kind of "realtime information" related to accessability: there might be a e.g. elevator, but if it is actually broken/out of order, the trip might not possible or transfer times might be longer due to detours.
Malte: Implicit interval needed (first real-time result)
Matthias: User Preferences and the score may also play into it.

Stefan: What would ideal trip reply do.

Stefan will provide a some concept. Work with André

@ue71603
Copy link
Contributor

ue71603 commented Aug 23, 2022

André: I will create a PR with my proposal.

@trurlurl
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is followed up by PR#235 and can be closed. I don't seem to have the right permissions to do it.

@trurlurl
Copy link
Contributor

trurlurl commented Oct 1, 2022

See PR #238 for indicating status information of access facilities. If the solution proposed there is sufficient then this issue can be closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants