Where Camp idea: central resource to track transit agency communication
Aaron Antrim
Does anyone else have it? Would anyone else be interested in participating in such a project?
Aaron
Joe Hughes
Google Transit group a little while ago in this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/googletransit/browse_thread/thread/336353808193275c
Joe
On May 20, 10:54 am, "Aaron Antrim" <aa...@arcatacommunity.org> wrote:
> After the TriMet
> presentation<http://www.slideshare.net/headway/portland-trimet-presentation-on-dat...>(link
Will
Aaron Antrim wrote:
> After the TriMet
> presentation<http://www.slideshare.net/headway/portland-trimet-presentation-on-data-sharing-updated-version/>(link
Michael Weisman
There is a small (but growing) group of us who met at the Vancouver
TransitCamp who are pushing for a public feed here. It would be great
if we could post information about what we have done, and who we have
spoken with so others who are interested in getting data can pick up
from where we are now, instead of starting from square one.
--
Michael Weisman
mwei...@gmail.com
http://www.mweisman.com
mikel...@gmail.com
I'm cool with having this resource as a Page in this group.
Or if an independent wiki is called for, could possibly set that up on
my webhost .. any idea on domain name?
Will
uncooperative transit agency.
Tom Brown
as long as no one has an issue with people posting info how to sue an
uncooperative transit agency.
I think this is an appropriate forum for discussing the challenges faced by transit developers. If a Page of this googlegroup helps you organize information about all non-illegal means of getting access to more data, go for it.
On the other hand I disagree that legal force is a good way to get more data. I would much rather we focus our energy demonstrating the value of published data than discussing legal methods. Last I checked this is a group of developers/programmers/hackers, not lawyers.
I can understand the frustration some developers have because Google Transit has non-public data. Here as a post that is very relevant:
http://groups.google.com/group/googletransit/browse_thread/thread/667c358f8fd6bd05/ea4d039fd646440c
We both know that publishing data will enable many kinds of new uses.
Some agencies have taken the leap and made it available. Others aren't
convinced a public feed is worth the resources it will take to
maintain, are concerned about how the data will be used or have
legitimate legal issues to address. Once people such as yourself have
created some useful apps using the data that's already available
(http://code.google.com/p/googletransitdatafeed/wiki/PublicFeeds) I
think the value of publishing will be much clearer and more agencies
will work to overcome the barriers.
Google Transit started by working with one agency. Our coverage has
expanded as agencies learned about the value of the product and the
ease of working with us. I'm optimistic that similar growth in public
data will happen as its value is demonstrated.
Will
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Will <wi...@onnyturf.com> wrote:
>
>
>> as long as no one has an issue with people posting info how to sue an
>> uncooperative transit agency.
>>
>>
>
> I think this is an appropriate forum for discussing the challenges faced by
> transit developers. If a Page of this googlegroup helps you organize
> information about all non-illegal means of getting access to more data, go
> for it.
>
> On the other hand I disagree that legal force is a good way to get more
> data. I would much rather we focus our energy demonstrating the value of
> published data than discussing legal methods. Last I checked this is a group
> of developers/programmers/hackers, not lawyers.
>
>
I'm not quite sure how to respond to such total disinformation. But I'll
give it a shot.
Laws exist to protect people, including developers. Transit agencies
develop their data with tax payer dollars, thus every American has a
right to the data. Some agencies take a very resistant approach to
giving the people what is rightfully theirs; using the courts in that
kind of situation is completely reasonable and very effective.
I met fierce opposition of data sharing from the New York State MTA. Yes
I started by asking nicely. But honestly, they don't care. So I filed a
FOIL request and even then they stalled; in one case we ultimately had
to file papers in court against one of their sub-agencies to make them
comply with the federal freedom of information law request. But I can
tell you, that made them pay attention! They settled immediately. So I
won and I now have the complete MTA schedule data set which I am happily
DEVELOPING with. And I got it a lot faster than by trying to prove to
them I'm worthy, when in fact I already had the right to the data anyway.
If this is about creating a knowledge share of experiences about how to
get data, it seems knowing one's legal rights and how to successfully
exercise them is certainly something worthy of inclusion. If its not
about that, then what's the point?
Joe Hughes
first flamewar!
Before things get out of hand, let's take a deep breath, try to keep
things civil, and give each other the benefit of the doubt that we're
all in this for the same reason, to build great transit sites. (The
toxic statements here were Tom's snarkier-than-necessary "this is a
group of developers/programmers/hackers, not lawyers" and Will's
accusation of "total disinformation".)
Only YOU can prevent forest fires,
Joe
Will
that legal pursuits are ineffective. They can be highly effective. If
people would like to learn more, I'm at your service. If not, then not,
that's fine too.
Mmm... look a frozen margarita on my desk, very cooling.
Kieran Huggins
redirecting to http://transitcamp.wik.is/ these days. I'm not sure if
there are plans to resurrect the original domain or not, but it's one
possible fit.
David Crow owns the domain, and Mark Kuznicki is one of the community
stewards in these parts. Might be worth contacting them.
Tom Brown
Lets make it happen!
Michael Weisman
I got a complaint and threat from a transit agency for scraping to a postgis database and building my own network topology. Turns out thier AUP says you can do whatever you want with the data, except redistribute it.
I guess I should write an app with a built in geo-spatial screen scraper. Technically I would not be distributing data. I wonder how long it would take to take out thier server if it became popular? I suppose it would force them to re-think the policy! :)
-----Original Message-----
From: "Tom Brown" <tom.bro...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 16:48:32
To:transit-d...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [transit-developers] Re: Where Camp idea: central resource to track
transit agency communication
I was wrong to suggest that the legal system is anything other than a tool to protect everybody's rights. Will has demonstrated that directed legal action can get data, which has been very useful for NY citizens. In general FOIA requests probably don't help us form a constructive relationship between developers and agencies. Maybe in a few years they'll look back and say "your FOIA requests helped move us forward" but I'm not holding my breath. In the long term I doubt these legal requests will make any difference one way or the other. I think that only the demonstrated value of public data will compel all transit operators to maintain timely, accurate and useful data.
Lets make it happen!
Will
No flames or snark intended in anyway.
Just a debate counter point that is meant to be informative to others
interested in getting schedule and other data from public agencies.
Here are a couple of things we ( my attorneys and I ) think are
important to consider in the matter of acquiring data from public
transit agencies, particularly schedule data.
/* Transit Agencies are already maintaining their schedule data */
Most transit agencies are maintaining online schedule lookup services.
They are either reading it from a database or text files. In some cases
both. All transit agencies maintain their schedule data for the purposes
of publishing print based schedules. They also do so for the purposes of
circulating schedule changes internally to their different internal
departments and contractors. So transit agencies are already maintaining
their data in some form. So there is no overhead for transit agencies to
keep their data up to date, they already do this. That doesn't mean they
are doing it in GTFS, but that hardly matters. Each transit agency
within the MTA has its is own data format. The NYC Transit agency is
maintaining two formats alone - one for bus and one for subway. We have
written a script to convert all that data to GTFS. We'll be publishing
the MTA Data, our scripts, and the GTFS sets once we have GraphServer
running smoothly. At this point the MTA could just use our scripts to
maintain their data in GTFS format. So they have zero overhead
maintenance cost, so it is not a reasonable excuse for not making data
public.
/* Transit Agencies do not like litigating */
Transit Agencies don't enjoy having to respond to FOIL requests or
having to respond to court filings. NYC Transit tried to put up a fight,
but that lasted only one or two phone calls. Long Island Rail Road
immediately backed down when we served them. They responded incredibly
foolishly to our FOIL request, so with them we were forced to file in
court. As soon as they were served, they were on the phone to my lawyers
asking what we wanted and jumping to make it happen. This story is
documented here:
http://www.onnyturf.com/blogs/view_post.php?content_id=11314
http://www.onnyturf.com/blogs/view_post.php?content_id=12210
http://www.onnyturf.com/blogs/view_post.php?content_id=12272
http://www.onnyturf.com/blogs/view_post.php?content_id=12379
What seemed to us that happened at LIRR was a junior attorney didn't
really know what the request was about and decided he didn't need to ask
someone technical what we were talking about. When they were served a
senior attorney got involved and told the person to get us what we
wanted, pronto!
Transit agencies periodically update their data. We expect to FOIL for
those updates until MTA decides they will eliminate the hassle for all
of us and simply publish it publicly. While Google may find it easier to
ask nice, we don't. We find the legal process very efficient.
/* Its our data anyway */
Last thing to remember, from our perspective: this data already belongs
to all of us. We could use printouts for toilet paper if we wanted to.
Legally speaking we need not explain or prove or demonstrate anything to
anyone. The data is created by a public agency using tax dollars; we are
entitled to the data unless the agency can prove some sort of incredibly
compelling reason to not give it to us. Further, legal precedent holds
they MUST deliver it digitally if they are maintaining it digitally, so
they can not just send you printed schedules - as they tried in our LIRR
case.
How you choose to pursuing things with your transit agency is up to you
and the resources you have available. Asking nice is one way, and suing
is another. I don't know that there is any evidence to support
litigating is less effective than asking nice when the agency is
non-responsive.
Will
> Of course the legal system can go the other way too.
>
> I got a complaint and threat from a transit agency for scraping to a postgis database and building my own network topology. Turns out thier AUP says you can do whatever you want with the data, except redistribute it.
>
>
Aaron Antrim
Here are my 2¢.
I think it would be better to use a Wiki outside of the "Pages" function in this Google Group for these reasons:
- The two resources (this list and the wiki) should best exist alone -- so that the participants in one don't necessarily have to be, or appear to be participants in the other
- An outside Wiki would allow anonymous edits
- An outside Wiki would provide better watchlisting
Also, www.transitcamp.org loaded in my browser without a redirect. Could be a good venue.
I also want to mention that GetSatisfaction.com and PlanetFeedback.com are both powerful tools for having conversations with transit agencies. They could be used in conjunction with a wiki.
As far as the discussion about the intention and use of the site goes: I wouldn't make an attempt to control what people contribute to the wiki, but the content on the site may influence my readiness to participate.
I brought this up as (1.) a citizen who wants tools for us to hold unresponsive public agencies more accountable to their constituents, and (2.) as a business person who wants to develop client relationships with more agencies, and who needs to cultivate good, trusting relationships for that to happen.
These two goals are only compatible if the resource is not perceived as a hostile threat to agencies. In other words, while I think that legal avenues may be useful and necessary sometimes, if there is an abundance of legal discussion in this particular resource which agencies perceive as threatening, then it would place my business at risk to be associated with the Wiki or google page, and I would be disinclined to participate.
Does this make sense?
Aaron
Joa
On May 20, 5:39 pm, Will <w...@onnyturf.com> wrote:
> Legally speaking we need not explain or prove or demonstrate anything to
> anyone.
lack of any obvious explanation, let me ask why you go out here, and
in the referenced blogs, far and wide to build your case?
JP
Joe Hughes
I'm reposting it here with permission of the author (who doesn't want
to join this group because they don't consider themselves a
developer). There's some talk about Google Transit that aren't
relevant here, but I the parts about data sharing fit well in this
conversation.
Joe
cross-posted message begins
below--------------------------8<------------------------
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:07 PM, bravo <sdb...@gmail.com> wrote:
There has been a lot of talk about getting an agency to join Google
Transit. Several people have proclaimed that they don't understand
why a public agency won't publish its data for everyone to use
freely. I think there are several reasons why agencies hesitate to
publish their data in an open format.
One reason is that agencies simply don't understand what benefits open
data will have for them. For years, public transit agencies have been
purchasing very expensive programs from companies like NextBus,
Siemens, Trapeze, Giro, etc. in order to publish their data on the web
or for use in a trip planner, for publishing vehicle arrival
information, etc. It's my understanding that even through Google
Transit currently has no cost, the contract for Google Transit doesn't
guarantee that a fee will never be charged for the service.
Therefore, a public agency might feel like it's being pushed to
provide data in a format that will end up costing the agency money to
publish and maintain, but which other companies will then profit from
and expect access to in the future. This can be a heavy burden for
agencies that don't have IT staff with the talent of a company like
Google or the vision of an agency like TriMet. Tell the agency that
there are companies and consultants that will assist them in setting
up the information (another cost, but hopefully minimal).
Another reason for an agency to hesitate to freely publish their
scheduling data in a format like GTFS is that they can't control
what's being put out there. Public employees worry about the bad
stuff - because that's what will be reported by the media and that can
cost them their jobs (with good pensions, good wages, and a sense of
stability). But, you need to allay their concerns and prove to them
that publishing data openly is positive. Can you show a specific
example of a program using the data that benefits current and future
passengers? Are there other ways this feed will benefit the agency?
Can it save them money?
Lastly, agencies worry about security. After 9/11, transit agencies
are on high security alert. If somebody knew all of the bus stops,
all of the stations (and their schematics), all of the scheduled stop
times, and all of the block numbers, could they cause mischief? This
is what goes through a public administrator's mind when this type of
request is placed in front of them. Help them to understand that
their websites already have this information, it's just in a different
format. This is reformatting data they already have out there for the
good of their riding public.
TIPS ON SOLICITING A TRANSIT AGENCY
If you are emailing an agency through their web contact form and you
are receiving a template response or a cold shoulder, you aren't
taking enough steps. Who has the power in transit agencies to make
things happen? The Board of Directors. Find out who is on your
transit agency Board of Directors. Do politicians make up the board?
Call their office and talk with their staff about it. Is the Board
appointed? Find out who the Board members are and visit them at their
business, home, or if you see them in public, talk to them. Go to a
Board of Directors meeting and speak during the public comment period
- all of the agency's management should be there including the top
administrator, the head of operations, and maybe even the head of IT.
Be positive - give examples of the benefits that other agencies have
experienced. Give an example of how you think the data could be
used. Tell them that providing the data will come at a small cost,
but the ingenuity and hard work of the weekend warriors and for-profit
companies will benefit them since they won't have to pay for any of
these programs like they used to. It's like free advertising. Say
you're willing to help the agency in any way you can. Tell them the
world is signing on (literally). Ask the Board of Directors to do a
Google maps search for themselves so they can see the "Take Public
Transit" link show up in their results. Their eyes will light up.
Ask the agency before arriving at a Board Meeting if you can provide a
slide presentation during your comment or use a computer and projector
for a live demonstration.
Who will this benefit? Is it just a pet project that people with
iPhones will benefit from? Remember that many people (not all) who
take public transit take it because they have no other choice. Try to
give an example that benefits all riders, not just those with an
iPhone or Blackberry.
Get a petition together. There's no law that says that if you collect
x signatures then the agency has to provide the data. But, if you get
your petition signed by people _riding the system_ and then send a
copy to the agency and one to each Board member, you will get them
talking about it.
I know that many won't agree with what I've stated, but I've tried to
pass on some understanding as well as a few tips about working with
Google and the GTFS.
On May 21, 1:59 am, "Aaron Antrim" <aa...@arcatacommunity.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here are my 2¢.
>
> I think it would be better to use a Wiki outside of the "Pages" function in
> this Google Group for these reasons:
>
> be participants in the other
> 3. An outside Wiki would provide better watchlisting
> As far as a venue, a new site could be created (how about something simple
> like transitcontacts.org?). Or, I think Appropedia.org, a site I helped
> start, may be an appropriate venue (http://www.appropedia.org/Portal:Transport). I'd want to confer with some
> others, though, first.
>
Will
benchmarks from success stories to know how effective these are. Like
time spent trying to get a meeting with the board and meeting with them.
How much time is spent gathering petitions, how many signatures
gathered, what percent of transit ridership signed. How long did the
agency take to respond to these approaches. Etc.
Benchmarking on FOIL: we faced data prep and delivery fees of about $50
per sub-agency (cost of burning a CD with the data for us by the Transit
Agency). Prepping the paperwork for the FOIL was a day (i'll gladly post
my FOIL letter which others can then copy paste to use if they want).
FOILs require timely response but most govt agencies blow you off on
that. We filed, were denied in several cases after a few months or more,
appealed, won on appeal after another month or two (it varied by
sub-agency), were denied a second time by LIRR. Filed in court which
cost a couple hundred dollars. We had a settlement and data within a
week of settling. I think it took us about 5-6 months overall from
initial FOIL to getting the last data set, which at the time seemed like
forever, but on reflection was pretty quick. In the case of Metro North
they responded very fast, in something like a month or so. There was
also the cost of having a real attorney to do all discussions with the
agencies. My total bill for getting all MTA data was $700. My lawyers
are friends and a bunch of civil rights do gooders who wanted to do the
FOIL, so it was a bargin. YMMV.
mikel...@gmail.com
for the resource as fleshed out in this thread. Once we have the basic
site up, I'll be back to share.
Cheers
Mikel