Open software in the field of mobility & transport

1.
Open software in the field of mobility and transports
Survey Answers​ , link to 1​ st​
workshop ​ wiki
Why open software ?​ 26% for an open license and 100% for a community of contributor
For software edition, how do you manage your community ?
● Involving members in the steering committee (like ​OpenTripPlanner​ ) representing
communities and organizations that have professional developers dedicated to transport
software
● Cost sharing developments among several actors.
● Identify community support time on apps released
● Targeted communication to improve involvement of the community (conferences , workshops
... )
● Mailing list, issues on github
● Organizing events to start a community
● By different ways !
● "nice dictator" show the community that we have a vision and do not accept anything.
Supporting contributors to maintain the overall consistency of the software. Guide specific
needs to make them more universal (cf. common)

2. how do you contribute to the development ?
● Contribution :
o complementary development,
o coordination of OpenTrip Planner community for example, answering
questions from developpers and users promotion of open source and open data
in Europe
o By developing open source approach on Calypso to create open source
ticketing in order to simplify integration in many applications using SDK.
o Bug reports, pull requests
o Contributing corrections and new functionality. Try to contribute new
functionality in a way it could be made configurable.
● Research funding
● Identification of end use cases
● Certification : Calypso Networks Association , as Calypso Foundation , will also have
a role in certifying the solutions made ​​to ensure all users who wish, security and
interoperability.
● Standardisation : Our main contribution to the evolving GTFS standard today is about
how to modify a western­inspired standard for different contexts and real­world
situations of the third world. This includes local presentations in Cairo, as well as
International ones. ​http://csvconf.com/#mhegazy
● Advise : board advise new transport schemes, consult for authorities and other
businesses as well as write for trade press and university lecture on mobility
If you are user, how do you contribute ?
● Discussion, promotion, presentations towards many stakeholders
● seek out open source solutions that meet the needs of clients
● Support on stack­overflow
● contributing and starting a debate on the applicability of software devised in and for
use in the developed world and its limitations in application to the developing world.
● Tests, analyse and bugs corrections, forums contribution and support
● meet­up open transport to share and present, networking
● Sponsoring OpenStreetMap France
● It is a concern as a "user enterprise" to contribute to the Free Software ecosystem, so
that it is "sustainable" for its producers (ensuring a sustainable income), sustainable
for its users (not uncontrollably royalty or confinement of the solution)
● Lobbying
● We contribute to the Open Trip Planner community by reporting errors, and
sometimes possible soilutons.
Do you think that open software has a special role for projects managed by the public sector and
local authority ?
Yes
● for inclusion in public tenders
● in order to improve sharing and reutilization

3. ● providing a basic capability for all potential participants to actively engage in the project on a
consistent basis.
● By giving a large offer of technical solution (for ticketing for example) with a strong
governance,
● The public sector should always be contributing back to the common good
● City & free software community are complementary, it should not be any proprietary software
when public money is involved.
● common interest and therefore shared needs and shareable by nature! a normally ideal context
for open source
● in order to rationalise and standardise
● to avoid vendor lock­in and bring new players
● mutualisation ­ cf. initiative type ​http://www.adullact.org/
● Yes, main alternative vs GAFA?
● We are spending tax payers' money and should be careful about costs. When now also open
software is available and good enough, we should be good examples for other actors.
● I believe open source software within the public sector has a huge potential. However,
successful project need to show this potential since there is a lot of skepticism
But
● the details of how and actual implementation are still evolving.
● using open software is a huge cultural change for government bodies and they need to
understand these implications
● It’s complementary to traditional offers under license with risk & benefit
No, It’s the public sector who should be active on open source and not the opposite
Do you think that open software has a special role to play with standards and normalisation ?
Yes
● For interoperability
● providing initial test cases to establish and refine the standards
● reconciling open source like Calypso integration software , and certification of products, is
able to provide users with solutions in full compliance with the standards. In this sense, open
source can be a support standardization , excluding any proprietarisation .
● Without question (see GTFS for a good example). Proprietary platforms lead to fragmentation,
and silos.
● through greater transparency
● The standards are often experienced as a constraint for suppliers , and sometimes a complex
picture : the free tools simplifies access . Moreover, in the absence of independent certification
structure , a shared software remains the best tool for validation and compliance monitoring
● We need standards compatible with open projects dynamics
● We should validate and improve more quickly standards
● Yes, but have the time to do that ? pb of funding by users
● Yes, because it reduce This limits the effects of "annuity" around a certifier and decrease
barrier effects to entry
● Yes, open software should keep to standards as often as possible, to act as a counterweight to
vendor lock­in and so called "vendor standards".
● Their intrinsic openness promotes adoption by co­creating solutions, the latter benefiting from
their origination strategic insights. They are therefore in a unique position to produce
standards of fact, or draw ­ at a minimum ­ the contours of future standards.

4. ● Definitely, This is very obvious when you work with transit data and see the challenges of
lack of standardization or proprietary standard.
No
● it’s the other way
● These are two very different worlds. Convergence seems difficult until now. Convenience is
unfortunately often opposes organizations working on standards
● Not necessarily. The standard should be defined in advance.
Do you think it is more relevant to work at ? national 30%, European 78% or international 60 %
Your interest :
● Solutions for public Transportation (isochronal, timetable, map ...) : 82%
● open software for data exchange in the field of Collective Transportation sector : 74%
● software for creating database of vehicle stop for Collective Transportation (BATO
https://github.com/bato­fr​) : 48%
● Test bench for multimodal route calculations : 48%
● Other : 26% => beyond collective & public transportation, Integration of different mobility
services (public/private/collective/individual): Information, planification, real time
guidance, check in/check out/payment, simulation for driverless vehicle, real time open
data, standardise API for ridesharing
Your projects :
● Transfermuga, mobility assistance across borders, using open street map, uMap, Wordpress,
Navitia.io ​http://www.transfermuga.eu/fr/
● Métromobilité (​www.metromobilite.fr​ et ​http://github.com/Metromobilite​ )
● Open Trip Planner
https://github.com/opentripplanner/OpenTripPlanner​ ​https://github.com/conveyal/r5
https://github.com/conveyal/analyst­server​ ​https://github.com/conveyal/scenario­editor
https://github.com/conveyal/gtfs­editor​ ​http://conveyal­data­tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
● Developing a project with TravelSpirit to incorporate open source software into demand
responsive and community transport options. ​http://www.travelspirit.io/
● Calypso ​https://www.calypsonet­asso.org/
● working with GTFS­Flex, as well as RidePilot and the RideConnection Clearing House.
https://github.com/rideconnection/ridepilot
● co­development with IFSTTAR of a Framework for multimodal routing development
http://www.oslandia.com/new­version­of­tempus­a­framework­for­multimodal­route­planning
­en.html
GitHub platform for the projet Tempus: ​https://github.com/Ifsttar/Tempus
● http://transportforcairo.com/
● Simply­connect : ​www.simply­connect.com
● Chouette : ​http://www.chouette.mobi/
● http://www.Catalogue.global
● Ruter Labs ​https://ruter.no/labs
● www.nasjonalreiseplanlegger.com​ (project website) / ​www.dit.no​ (Jouney planner ­ BETA)