View Single Post
  #148   Report Post  
Old June 30th 14, 03:48 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Kevin Ayton[_2_] Kevin Ayton[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2010
Posts: 23
Default TfL acknowledges contactless technology risk

On 29/06/2014 09:41, tim..... wrote:


"David Walters" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:55:54 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:
More difficult is if you have trips to different destinations loaded as
vouchers. Say you live in Grays and have vouchers for both Southend and
London, because you anticipate visiting both soon (and not necessarily
knowing in which order). Which voucher should it swap for a ticket?


Order is apparently important. From
http://www.c2c-online.co.uk/customer...c2c-smart-faqs "PLEASE
NOTE: Tickets can only be used in the order in which they were
purchased".


That still doesn't help with deciding if a pax who travelled from home
(A) to work (X) on a return ticket and has just purchased a ticket from
X to B, is starting his journey to B or his return to A.

We could, of course, come up with some rules to resolve every such
conflicts, but that, I would suggest, would make user reluctance to use
such tickets reach the stratosphere

tim




That very problem was solved with version 2.1.4 of the ITSO Technical
Spec and the changes to the specification of the TYP24 IPE - sorry to
get technical, but you don't have much option with ITSO!

Suppose you have a number of rail tickets, encoded as ITSO TYP 24
products on you card, and you make a journey....

- at the point of initial validation (the entry gate), a list of the
potentially valid tickets on the card is written to the "Transient
Ticket" on the card.
- at subsequent valdiations - whether on train, at an intermediate
station, or at the final exit gate - that list is examined, and any
tickets that are not valid "here and now" are removed from the list.
- on final exit if the number of potentially valid tickets is 1, then we
are done. If it is zero there will be an excess or penalty to pay, with
a manual procedure to be follwed. If the number is greater than once
then again a manual procedure will be required. BUt that should only
happen in a small number of degenerate cases.

A lot of this is set out in an RSP document (RSPS3002 IIRC) which some
former colleagues mine helped to author a few years ago.

Hope that helps

Kevin