RE: [gtfs-changes] proposal: User uploaded-fed-tracked information added to Google Transit and made globally available anonymously. Google Transit v2.0 :-)

[Roger Slevin]

Alistair

Sorry - but if that were to happen my agency will remove its data from
Google Transit. It is essential for us that Google Transit remains sourced
only with data supplied by the relevant agencies.

Roger

-----Original Message-----
From: gtfs-c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:gtfs-c...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Alistair Riddoch, SHBEW Product Development and Design
Sent: 09 March 2013 5:34 PM
To: gtfs-c...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [gtfs-changes] proposal: User uploaded-fed-tracked information
added to Google Transit and made globally available anonymously. Google
Transit v2.0 :-)


Dear fellow Google Transit improvers,

Please consider, if it has not been proposed before....(please accept my
apologies if it has been suggested already)

in a similar fashion to wikipedia, allow Google Transit to become a user fed
information system, with official info over-ride, for where this information
is available.

this allows the users to circumnavigate budgets, politics, or a lack of
support from officialdom. it allows users to provide the data that they
want to recieve.

it allows users to upload route info, stop info, schedule info, because they
see the value in the existence of that data, and they see the value in not
waiting for their system/municipality to provide it.

further, with voluntary tracking of smart phones, users could even provide
snippets of real time tracking information. with enough real-time tracking
snippets, in denser transit systems, access to significantly accurate real
time information could be provided to users AT NO COST TO
MUNICIPALITY/TRANSIT AUTHORITY. And without the need for municipal/transit
system spending, deciding, doing anything.

as the system permeates farther and is used by more people, it could also
allow a dropping in the maintenance of existing rider information systems
that cost far more to operate.

users could upload information about stops, routes, schedules, route
parameters, etc.

displayed information colour coded to demonstrate qty of providers to
display likely accuracy of source. low vote info prompts more requests for
updates to the information from people using the system.

individual tracking phones could be used as fixtures on transit vehicles to
provide this same type of tracking at costs far below current proprietary
system implementation costs, which seem to be $8,500-$11,000 US dollars per
vehicle. if a transit system preferred using their own device, as opposed
to relying on user fed info, they could install a smart-tablet, with gps and
cell capability.
That would provide tracking, mapping, scheduling, emergency contact, timing
indicators, location call-outs, and map display, all in one, for much less
than any commercially available solution today. Say about 10-15% of current
proprietary systems cost. or $1000-$1500 per but instead of $8500-$11000
per bus (depends on qty of buses).

comments welcomed.
Alistair Riddoch
SHBEW Product Design and Development
SHBEW - Simply Hoping for the Betterment of the Entire World!

my contact info is
Alistair...@gmail.com
Barrie, ON, Canada.

p.s. I am NOT the Alistair Riddoch that works for Google in Scotland. :-)

p.p.s. I have told my girlfriend, Susan Jessica Redgate, that this idea can
change the world. She is skeptical. We have made a deal whereby when I
recieve some official confirmation that this idea, could or will change the
world, she will accept the offer of my hand in marriage. If you have an
official capacity, see the merit of this idea, and have the ability to do
so, please e-mail Sue through me at alistair...@gmail.com, on my
behalf, telling her, yes indeed the world can\will change based on this
concept. It is very important to me, that this happens as quickly as
possible. I offer this idea freely and without expectation otherwise.

Cheers,
Alistair Riddoch

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"General Transit Feed Spec Changes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to gtfs-changes...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to gtfs-c...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gtfs-changes?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Andrew Byrd]

Hi Alistair,

This mailing list is about GTFS, a schedule data exchange format which
was popularized by Google but is now an open standard. What you're
asking for is a new component in the transit services provided by
Google, which is only one of many consumers of GTFS feeds.

Many transit developers would agree that what you are describing is a
great idea. However, Google is probably not in a position to provide
such a service because many transit agencies would fight it (as
evidenced by Roger's reply).

There is a large community of software developers who are interested in
public transit data -- collecting and integrating it as well as reusing
it for passenger information systems, mobile apps, etc. A lot of these
people hang out on the transit-developers list, which is more geared
toward this kind of discussion.

Waiting for someone to provide the service will probably not work -- you
need to organize people to design a collaborative system for
crowdsourcing schedule and perhaps real-time delay information, and
publishing that in standard machine-readable formats like GTFS.

Google might not be able to accept data from such "unofficial" sources,
but one of the many other trip planner app providers might pick it up,
or you could run your own server (there are many open source
GTFS-consuming products).

In this way, the public can simply circumvent transit operators that
prohibit us from accessing and using raw schedule data.

-Andrew

[Brian Ferris]

Hey Alistair,

I'll echo Andrew's comments that you shouldn't worry too much about what Google thinks is a good idea.  If you truly believe that user-generated transit data can change the world, then that should be enough.  But of course, the old truism about invention being 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration still applies.  The world will only change if you make it happen, which means working to champion such a system yourself.  Reaching out to the transit-developers mailing list would be a good place to start.

Either way, I'm hesitant to let one email from a random Googler determine something so important as whether two people get married.  I will hedge and cautiously commit that your idea could change the world.  But, like I said, the question is less "Can this idea change the world?" but instead "Can I change the world?"  If you and Sue think the answer might be yes, then I think you will have many happy years together in your future.

Brian

P.S. I will say that it's a good idea to keep some balance between your transit hacking and married life.  I speak from experience ; )

[Alistair Riddoch]

Well thank you everyone for your interest and taking the time to reply.

Roger.  I understand your point of view.  Maybe a second standard will have to exist.  Or a layered standard, that draws from GTFS, and makes it's own user fed information accessible as well.  I think this is the model OpenStreetMaps uses to "seed" their data with Google maps, while still giving users the opportunity to "carve their own destiny" by uploading better, more accurate information.  To help have a universal map that penetrates to anywhere anyone wants it too, not just as consistently, persistently, or in as much detail as a corporation wants it to be.

People in cities that have systems in place may have difficulty empathizing with the 5 million riders in Monterrey, Mexico, or the 5,000 riders in Barrie, Ontario Canada, where either budget, politics, infrastructure or just being behind, have caused their systems to not have access to the type of technology available in other areas.  So sure, a guy living in London England, who has all the real-time transit feeds he can desire, may say - "user fed information", to iffy, no thanks.

BUT there are at least tens of millions of transit riders around the world who are in the dark.  For them the battle isn't 99.99 % accuracy of information at interconnect points between transit systems, it is there is NO transit system.  

But the data is all there, millions of smart phones running around back and forth, trains, buses, subways, trams.

And the will is there - all of the most popular websites prove that.  They are all powered by the contributions of others.

And then the cost to cities that do have systems may deflate over time.

It may be hard for some to see, but having done some work with CMM machines, measuring parts, and quality control, I know what you can do with a million little pieces of accurately measured co-ordinate information and I can't help but see value in the existence of the result.

I understand if maybe I opened this can of worms in the wrong place, politically or purpose focus speaking.

Excuse my oversight on the Google-General transition.  I was aware, but gapped.

I am not really hinging a marriage proposal on this particular concept being validated.  Just having a little late night fun with my girlfriend, will be wife.  tongue in cheek.  Teasing her in a positive way.

No, I have no intention of being a champion of the cause.  That is not my forte, nor is transit my area of direct strength.  I believe in the concept enough to carry it until I find the right champion.  a more "project manager" type mentality.  Somone already in the transit scheduling game, who sees the value of the concept and runs with it.

I am not worried about credit really.

Nor am I worried about being the cause of it happening, or whether it will happen.  I beileve it will (matter of time), I would guess many others have had the same thought.  the end result is a beautiful, self driven, self maintaining, self motivated system that pushes access to schedule information down into the areas of society where it will not get to for many years, without self help.

and I believe that will come about whether I am the "originator" of the concept, or not, because I think in most places it is the right answer given the resources at hand currently, so it will happen.  (IMHO)

Correcting me if I am wrong, this is NOT the right venue, for the potential addition of layered and qualified information )with official info taking priority), that feeds into a central universal open standard database for information of this nature??  

I consider , Orillia, Ontario, Canada.  they DO upload their schedule data, as do the city interconnect services that connect it to Barrie.  But Barrie, On, Canada, has NOT uploaded their data.  "working on it".  Been "working on it" for years (a GPS and user information system, that is)..

So if Barrie users COULD upload and maintain a "user" version of Barrie's static schedule information, this would affect who, how???

   Barrie - Riders happy, at least they have smart phone accessible predictive scheduling.  Rejoice.

   Barrie Transit Commission.  The pressure is off, they can finish their project their way, no pressure.

   Interconnect services - Better information re connecting buses, happier riders.

   Neighbouring cities like Orillia - resident benefit from ability to schedule seamless trips in one system, from their door to a door in Barrie

And if a single, tiered, qualified, universal, central, open standard database of scheduled transit information ISN'T the right place to be discussing this, please remind me of where I should be discussing it???

Funny story - when I first thought up the idea (user fed schedule info, and potentially real time tracking, and talked to Barrie Tranis commission, they said, "well it sounds like a great idea, they call it Google Transit" (Now General).

And maybe I'm wrong, but I think bringing 99% information to the remaining 50% of the world with none, might be a better big picture approach, than making the 99% information 99.5 percent useful and accurate.  Ignore the 50% of the world that have nothing.  Including Barrie, ON, Canada (in a highly technologically advanced country?!?!?!).

I know everyone wants to do the most good with their time, and efforts, and I don't know who's paid to be here, or if this is all free contribution??

But the purpose is Universal open standard data collecting and storage and access to, scheduling information for all the scheduled transit in the world, n'est pas?  Or is it just for the cities with the right politics?

Or are the interests of the GTFS purely for commercial data interchange??

I may have misinterpreted it's purpose.

Correct me and forgive me if I am wrong.

Cheers,

Alistair

alistair...@gmail.com

[Andrew Byrd]

03/12/2013 08:23 PM, Alistair Riddoch wrote:
> And if a single, tiered, qualified, universal, central, open standard
> database of scheduled transit information ISN'T the right place to be
> discussing this, please remind me of where I should be discussing it???

This list is for discussing an open data storage and exchange format,
not the way the data is collected, distributed, or used.
See: https://developers.google.com/transit/gtfs/changes

> I think this is the
> model OpenStreetMaps uses to "seed" their data with Google maps, while
> still giving users the opportunity to "carve their own destiny" by
> uploading better, more accurate information.

You may be misunderstanding what OpenStreetMap is:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F

> BUT there are at least tens of millions of transit riders around the
> world who are in the dark. For them the battle isn't 99.99 % accuracy
> of information at interconnect points between transit systems, it is
> there is NO transit system.

I don't think people have difficulty empathizing with them, it's just a
completely different problem. In some cities the operators share the
data freely, in others they resist sharing the data, and in others the
data does not exist yet or has not been collected/normalized.

Some colleagues of mine are currently working on using mobile devices to
build GTFS feeds for cities in the Philippines, Vietnam, and Mexico.
Besides informing passengers, the data should help in operations and
planning. We've been getting an increasing amount of support from large
international organizations to carry out this kind of work.

> No, I have no intention of being a champion of the cause. That is not
> my forte, nor is transit my area of direct strength. I believe in the
> concept enough to carry it until I find the right champion. a more
> "project manager" type mentality. Somone already in the transit
> scheduling game, who sees the value of the concept and runs with it.

Many people are interested in what you are describing and working on
pieces of it. The ideas already exist, and would benefit mostly from
organization and funding or labor.

However, as far as I know the leap to a single wiki-like database for
transit schedules has not yet been made (data collection efforts with
mobile devices still require local organizational effort and a
"collection point"). That would be interesting to see happen.

> I know everyone wants to do the most good with their time, and efforts,
> and I don't know who's paid to be here, or if this is all free
> contribution??

A lot of people do paid work on passenger information systems or apps,
or are studying transportation engineering or algorithms or whatever,
and contribute to these lists as a way of advancing standards. It's
partly done "on company time" and partly out of personal interest, in
the long tradition of blurring the line between work and personal life :)

> But the purpose is Universal open standard data collecting and storage
> and access to, scheduling information for all the scheduled transit in
> the world

Some of us share that purpose, others don't. The beauty of open
standards is that it doesn't matter what we are using them for, we all
want a predictable way to exchange information.

> Or are the interests of the GTFS purely for commercial data interchange??
> I may have misinterpreted it's purpose.

As already stated, the Google/General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS)
and Google Transit are two different things. Just as PDF files could be
used to submit some information to an engineering firm doing some work
for you, GTFS files can be submitted to Google so they can provide
transit routing and mapping for you. Just as you can send the same PDF
files to another engineering firm or your colleagues, you can send GTFS
files to another transit data provider, or exchange the same data
internally within an organization of your own creation.

You might need to augment the schedule data with some author or change
sequence information to make a collaborative editing system and enable
moderation, but such a system would probably export GTFS rather than use
it as the internal representation.

-Andrew

[Tim Cooper]

+1 to what Brian said:  it's a good idea, but you need to actually do it.  You're proposing a public transport version of "OpenStreetMap".  You could even do it as an add-on to "OpenStreetMap".

I would not be worried about transport authorities blocking the idea, they can't stop you using GTFS format data for a "GTFS wiki", provided your crowd-sourced data is not mixed or confused with the authoritative data that presumably most people would continue to use.  

Anyway, I think it's  a good idea because there are many cities in the world where the authorities are slow to act, and even in cities with GTFS, there is a lot of additional data that users could provide that the authorities don't. You can then control what extensions to GTFS you implement, and if you gain traction then that makes a case for adding your extensions into GTFS.

btw - on the general issue of "extensions to GTFS", there seems to be a lot of discussion here about extensions to GTFS, but not a lot of actual ratification of extensions.  I find GTFS pretty good for our purposes, and I'd hate to have a whole bunch of new semantics that I'd be obliged to implement.  The proposals are all worthwhile but they seem to be going in 100 different directions.