Web conference notes, 2021.05.13 (Joint Working Group)

Web Conference, 2021.05.13

Joint Working Group - City Services

Every other week call at 9am PT / 12pm ET / 6pm CET

Conference Call Info

#red NOTE NEW ZOOM MEETING ID/LINK/PHONE! (as of Jan 1, 2021)

Meeting ID: 841 7098 9462 - Passcode 612987
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84170989462?pwd=WTRlY25wOVhNeS8wQk1iM2QzYkQvUT09

One tap mobile: +19294362866,,84170989462#,,,,*612987# US (New York)

Dial by phone: +1 929 436 2866 (US) (Find your local number)

Attendees

Add your own name, link, and organization during call

Michael Schnuerle, OMF
Steve Brining, Blue Systems
Mitch Vars, MobilityData
Seth Herr
19 attendees

Agenda

Main Topics

Final changes to move Provider Vehicles out of beta
- See information about Issue 637 here

WGSC Meeting Organizers

Host: Steve Brining
Facilitator: ...
Outreach: Michael Schnuerle
Note taker: Michael Schnuerle

Minutes

Marie - Adding only PROW was initially meant to just mimic GBFS. But it should be all locations and not just PROW.
Populus - when it leaves the PROW, where it goes, and when it comes back is important
E and A - agree
Dirk thinks PROW is adequate
Michael says at least unknown states should show up too
ACTION ITEM - MS Ask Margo in the issue to highlight what was is inconsistent specifically and then take a look at it.
Sharada DC - Jurisdictions should be the discussion not just ROW. PROW and Jurisdiction are different. For example private property partners like national park service, or parking garages.
Multiple people agree that it's good to know when leaving the PROW, and for a few moments after that
Could use status_changes or events for this, but it's a bit cumbersome to check when a vehicle goes missing.
ACTION ITEM - Jurisdictions definition needs to be added in a PR. Then update Vehicles to say Jurisdiction, not PROW
Noted that PROW use and definition in MDS is not the true 'swiss cheese' of a PROW in a city. MDS States determine PROW without any calculations, more de facto assumptions based on the state.
Adding Jurisdiction could increase bounding box calculations if there are nearby jurisdictions
Cities want to know and get data for what’s in their jurisdiction, but it's ok to include a few outside of those.
Example: in Louisville, with no neighboring jurisdictions operating scooters, still responsible for devices across state lines, in other counties, or in one of the 85 interior sub-municipalities. So there is a sense of a 'responsibility' beyond that of the official jurisdiction. These still count as part of caps, for example.