On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:45:56 +0000 (UTC), Nick Leverton
wrote:

In article ,
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 22:26:38 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 19:59:37 on Fri, 3 Aug
2007, tim..... remarked:
They say all the ATOC cards [or is it phones] are going to be compatible
with each other, but I wouldn't take bets on it.

Being technically compatible and using the same stored
value may not be the same thing :-(

That's a whole new can of worms, but are you suggesting one smartcard
could have the stored value from dozens of different TOCs upon it (and

No, just that one TOCs card would be useless at a different TOC
even though they were technically compatable, unless the issue of
funds sharing is resolved.

Eh? Surely you put cash on the card and it's irrelevant who added it or
who deducts it provided there are systems to reconcile the card and
distribute the payments due against travel undertaken?

I'm not terribly au fait with ITSO but I thought the whole point of it
was that any suitable technically compliant card could hold / recognise
the ITSO specification and associated "product profiles" for each TOC

AIUI (I could be out of date, I've been out of EPOS for a long while)
there isn't currently any such concept as "cash on a card". Banks might
one day be able to issue cards that can hold cash, backed by their legally
mandated reserves in the same way as other accounts. But at present LUL
are just letting you pre-pay for their service with a fancy chip card to
record your pre-payment, which doesn't bring it within the legal reach
of either cash or credit regulations.

You could have "credit on a card", with the credit backed by the
card issuer. The product would just hold the amount of your current
credit with the particular issuer(s). One day all credit cards might
work that way, rather than the antiquated chip-and-pin bodge the UK has
only just got round to rolling out. I *think* I'm right in saying that
this is what Oyster would become if we went the Octopus route of paying
for small goods with your Oyster. I presume LUL would continue to only
give you credit against an equivalent deposit ! But it still wouldn't
be cash on the card, unless maybe LUL became a bank.

Cards with bank-backed stored value (essentially cash-on-a-card) have been
trialled a couple of times in small areas in the UK, but both fizzled
out about 10 years ago in a blaze of non-publicity. I never found out
the results of the trials and the reasons they weren't taken any further,
despite an interest in the subject.

Oh sure - I went to see the first trial that ran in Swindon. IIRC it was
called Mondex (had to drag that from the memory bank) but that was
contact based and was dreadfully slow on buses and at the then BR
station ticket office. Real cash (notes and coins) may bring all sorts
of expense but it is hugely convenient and easy for people to use. A
card based alternative has to have other benefits for people to consider
it worthwhile having a card. The public transport market in a high use
location (like London) has the potential to generate the card holding
base from which other applications can grow in popularity. Again HK
shows this the best.

ITSO (again AIUI, though I've not read in depth) is more about a
defined way to hold several products (so you could have one card
holding a couple of season tickets and some stored PAYG travel credits
and maybe your library card plus some credit value from your favourite
coffee shop) rather than either a way to hold cash or a way to use
those products.

I know you've actually worked on this stuff Paul, so please correct me
if wrong !

A long time ago and I don't pretend to be up to date. I fully understand
your point about whether it is "cash on the card" or not - you do get
into very hot water quite quickly with the financial regulators on this
point. We (the LT project team) certainly fell across it years and years
ago when we first looked at this. Octopus (Creative Star) found the
same in HK but they went the next step and became licensed deposit
holders (or whatever the HK term is).

Having read the two responses to my post I think I can see some not
insignificant issues emerging. Firstly the point about extending PAYG to
the Zonal Fare structure within the London zones. I do fully understand
the complications relating to routing and fares but this will become
more complex from 11 Nov this year when Overground starts and accepts
PAYG from Day One. Nonetheless there are significant challenges if PAYG
is to be rolled out within the zones on the same basis as TfL employ it
for DLR and LUL.

Still not 100% certain about how ITSO cards will work. I know Captain
Deltic did a short article in MR a number of months back and there were
certainly issues with the SWT product "profiles". If you wish to hold
something like a season ticket on a smartcard then that's fine and
fairly easy to deal with whether zonal or line of route. It is either
valid in certain places at certain times / dates or it is not. In
addition you've typically paid for it up front and the product is on the
card.

What is more intriguing is whether ITSO cards will allow people to
travel in the same manner as PAYG does - record entry and exit and fare
is deducted from your "credit" balance on the card. I assume it must
allow this sort of facility or else why bother. If not then I see little
gain because people will still have to queue to purchase a "ticket" that
will be held on the card for validation purposes. What the hell happens
on cross London zonal boundary (i.e. beyond Zone 6) trips I dread to
think. Perhaps the good Captain has a further article planned to get us
all up to date?
--
Paul C