On 10 Oct, 10:24, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Barry Salter wrote:
Walter Briscoe wrote:
In message
of Sun,
21 Sep 2008 15:57:13 in uk.transport.london, Mizter T
writes
[snip]
(And I'm pretty sure that Marylebone NR and Baker Street LU are tied
together as being a valid OOSI, and I think this is also the case with
regards to Fenchurch Street NR and Tower Hill LU - though annoyingly
Paddington NR and Lancaster Gate LU is not an OOSI.)

Both true. As is Euston Square and Euston but not ES and Warren Street.
I've just been through to LU customer services and got one of the more
helpful members of their staff. They will try to assemble a list of those
interchanges. If they do, I will forward here.

I would've thought a fairly good place to start would be the list of stations
that are valid for cross-London transfer for National Rail ticketing
purposes, as that'll give a vague idea.

Do OOSIs affect Oyster pay-as-you-go fares? I do Finsbury Park - Euston
- Watford Junction fairly often, and i have no idea if i'm being charged
for two trips or one. I suppose i could just go and look at my Oyster
history!

You should be charged for one. If you do A-B1 then B2-C, you'll be
charged the A-C fare, even if that's more then A-B plus B-C (though I
don't think it refunds you if A-C costs less than A-B).

Obtaining the official list of B1-B2 station pairs is what this thread
is about. Everyhing within the same station or marked on the tube map
should be on it, plus various others.

U

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:24:36 +0100,
Tom Anderson wrote:

Do OOSIs affect Oyster pay-as-you-go fares? I do Finsbury Park - Euston
- Watford Junction fairly often, and i have no idea if i'm being charged
for two trips or one. I suppose i could just go and look at my Oyster
history!

You're charged for one. Even if you were doing X - Euston Square walk
Euston - Watford Junction then it would be one.

I got bitten by this last Thursday. I had the day off and travelled into
London around 10am.

Without thinking I took the tube to Charing Cross instead of walking and
got the train back (I walked back but it was after 7pm). Kerching.
That's 3GBP for Euston-Charing Cross because Watford Junction-Zone1 at
that time of day is 6GBP even though WJ-Euston is 3GBP and
Euston-Zone1 is 1.50GBP. So much for always being charged the cheapest
fare on PAYG. (I was travelling with my partner - I wonder whether if
we'd swapped cards in Euston then they'd have to give me the 1.50GBP
back - that's then clearly two separate journeys on each card by two
different people and swapping PAYG cards is allowed.)

I'll try taking it up with TfL but last time I had something like this I
got an email acknowledgement but nothing futher at all (I asked for a
reply by letter as well as email - maybe that was a mistake)

Tim.


--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://www.woodall.me.uk/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

In message of Tue, 30 Sep 2008
15:56:35 in uk.transport.london, Walter Briscoe
writes
In message of Mon, 22 Sep 2008
10:27:13 in uk.transport.london, Walter Briscoe
writes
In message
of
Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:57:13 in uk.transport.london, Mizter T
writes
[snip]
(And I'm pretty sure that Marylebone NR and Baker Street LU are tied
together as being a valid OOSI, and I think this is also the case with
regards to Fenchurch Street NR and Tower Hill LU - though annoyingly
Paddington NR and Lancaster Gate LU is not an OOSI.)

Both true. As is Euston Square and Euston but not ES and Warren Street.
I've just been through to LU customer services and got one of the more
helpful members of their staff. They will try to assemble a list of
those interchanges. If they do, I will forward here.

They've just followed up to ask me to couch my request for information
as a Freedom of Information Act request. Heigh Ho!

They answered me, yesterday. Unfortunately, I can't copy the data un the
answer as they put the following in the reply: "Brief extracts of the
material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". I think they mistakenly refer
to the 1988 Act, but know nothing and may be wrong.

However I can give a flavour.

The following interests me:
London Fenchurch Street Aldgate 30
London Fenchurch Street Bank 30
London Fenchurch Street Monument 30
London Fenchurch Street Tower Gateway 30
London Fenchurch Street Tower Hill 30

The example above illustrates that 30 minutes is the most common budget.
A curious exception is White City Wood Lane where 20 is allowed.

Tower Hill is obvious; I had found Aldgate, experimentally.
I am surprised Bank is allowed. Journey Planner shows a 13 minute walk.

Bank to Monument is not shown; I queried that - given maintenance.
I am inclined to think there ought to be a super interchange covering
Bank, Cannon Street, Mansion House, Monument, Moorgate and probably one
or two more while escalators are out for maintenance.

Times for interchange are not always symmetrical. e.g.
40 is allowed from Aldgate to London Fenchurch Street.

I have also questioned 30 Canary Wharf Heron Quays 10.

The information was supplied as 90 rows in an Excel file where each row
describes a one way interchange. I will probably recast that as 45 rows,
each describing a two way interchange.

They don't publicise or guarantee the data will remain true.

In my FOI question, I asked for a list of out of station pay as you go
interchanges and how long was budgeted for them. I got no answer to my
question on the criteria for such interchanges but am satisfied that I
now know how to make good use of out of station interchanges.
--
Walter Briscoe

"Walter Briscoe" wrote in message
...

(And I'm pretty sure that Marylebone NR and Baker Street LU are tied
together as being a valid OOSI, and I think this is also the case
with
regards to Fenchurch Street NR and Tower Hill LU - though annoyingly
Paddington NR and Lancaster Gate LU is not an OOSI.)

Both true. As is Euston Square and Euston but not ES and Warren
Street.
I've just been through to LU customer services and got one of the
more helpful members of their staff. They will try to assemble a list
of those interchanges. If they do, I will forward here.

They've just followed up to ask me to couch my request for information
as a Freedom of Information Act request. Heigh Ho!

They answered me, yesterday. Unfortunately, I can't copy the data un
the answer as they put the following in the reply: "Brief extracts of
the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of
the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". I think they mistakenly
refer to the 1988 Act, but know nothing and may be wrong.

It seems you weren't the only one who asked.

http://londonreconnections.blogspot....ent.html#links

Times for interchange are not always symmetrical. e.g.
40 is allowed from Aldgate to London Fenchurch Street.

That is because of the frequency of trains from Fenchurch Street. If you
just miss a 2tph service then you may have to wait 20-25 minutes before
the platform of the next train is announced and you can pass through the
ticket barriers. So the interchange time has to allow for the worst case
scenario.

Peter Smyth

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Walter Briscoe wrote:

In message of Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:56:35
in uk.transport.london, Walter Briscoe writes
In message of Mon, 22 Sep 2008
10:27:13 in uk.transport.london, Walter Briscoe
writes
In message
of Sun,
21 Sep 2008 15:57:13 in uk.transport.london, Mizter T
writes
[snip]
(And I'm pretty sure that Marylebone NR and Baker Street LU are tied
together as being a valid OOSI, and I think this is also the case with
regards to Fenchurch Street NR and Tower Hill LU - though annoyingly
Paddington NR and Lancaster Gate LU is not an OOSI.)

Both true. As is Euston Square and Euston but not ES and Warren Street.
I've just been through to LU customer services and got one of the more
helpful members of their staff. They will try to assemble a list of those
interchanges. If they do, I will forward here.

They've just followed up to ask me to couch my request for information as a
Freedom of Information Act request. Heigh Ho!

They answered me, yesterday. Unfortunately, I can't copy the data un the
answer as they put the following in the reply: "Brief extracts of the
material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". I think they mistakenly refer to
the 1988 Act, but know nothing and may be wrong.

I imagine you're right. But: whilst they have copyright over the text of
the document, that doesn't cover the information within it - copyright is
over expressions, not ideas. Over the information, they (may) have a
database right, which stems from a bit of legislation that amended CDPA
1988, and did indeed come into force in 1998:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm

Which is all a bit mental and one of the bits of IP law i really don't
understand.

tom

--
Whose house? Run's house!

On 18 Nov, 23:55, Tom Anderson wrote:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm

The key part is he

"A property right ("database right") subsists, in accordance with this
Part, in a database if there has been a substantial investment in
obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of the database"

I don't think they could reasonably claim that, especially if the
version you did publish was radically reformatted, as Walter proposes.
It's already safe to say that the info isn't protected as a creative
work, so if it isn't a protected database either, it's arguably not
under copyright at all and you can do what you like with it.

U

In message of Tue,
18 Nov 2008 23:55:26 in uk.transport.london, Tom Anderson
writes
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Walter Briscoe wrote:

[snip]

They answered me, yesterday. Unfortunately, I can't copy the data un
the answer as they put the following in the reply: "Brief extracts of
the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of
the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". I think they mistakenly
refer to the 1988 Act, but know nothing and may be wrong.

I imagine you're right. But: whilst they have copyright over the text
of the document, that doesn't cover the information within it -
copyright is over expressions, not ideas. Over the information, they
(may) have a database right, which stems from a bit of legislation that
amended CDPA 1988, and did indeed come into force in 1998:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm

Which is all a bit mental and one of the bits of IP law i really don't
understand.

The words used are "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998 (sections 29
and 30)". You refer to a statutory instrument.

In message of Tue, 18 Nov 2008
23:09:23 in uk.transport.london, Peter Smyth
writes
[snip]
It seems you weren't the only one who asked.

http://londonreconnections.blogspot....tion-interchan
ges-current.html#links

where there is a reference to http://www.dragondark.co.uk/osi/osi.htm
which, prima facie, is a copy of the data I got.

This is a transposition of the data to halve the number of lines. It
shows some weirdness around King's Cross. I added ? to show data, not
supplied but implied by symmetry. I think the data is wrong here as it
shows OSI between "King's Cross St. Pancras Met" (with Circle,
Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan services?) and "King's Cross St.
Pancras Tube" (with Northern, Piccadilly and Victoria services?). I was
irritated when such OSI stopped working once it became possible to go
between those parts of the station without traversing two gatelines.

Time limits (in minutes) for free Pay As You Go Out of Station TfL
Interchanges
A-B Station B type Station A
type B-A
40 Aldgate LU London Fenchurch Street
NR 30
30 Archway LU Upper Holloway
NR 30
50 Baker Street LU London Marylebone
NR 30
30 Bank Central/Northern/DLR LU Bank Waterloo & City
LU 30
40 Bank LU London Fenchurch Street
NR 30
30 Blackfriars LU London Blackfriars
NR 30
30 Bow Church DLR Bow Road
LU 30
30 Canary Wharf DLR Canary Wharf
LU 30
10 Canary Wharf LU Heron Quays
DLR 30
50 Edgware Road H&C LU London Marylebone
NR 30
30 Elephant & Castle LU Elephant & Castle
NR 30
30 Euston LU Euston Square
LU 30
30 Euston LU London Euston
NR 45
50 Euston Square LU London Euston
NR 30
25 Finchley Road LU Finchley Road & Frognal
NR 25
30 Hackney Central NR Hackney Downs
NR 30
30 Hammersmith D&P LU Hammersmith H&C
LU 30
25 Hanger Lane LU Park Royal
LU 25
30 Kenton NR Northwick Park
LU 30
30 King's Cross St. Pancras Met LU King's Cross St. Pancras Tube
LU 30
30 King's Cross St. Pancras Met LU London King's Cross
NR ?
? King's Cross St. Pancras Met NR London King's Cross
LU 30
30 King's Cross St. Pancras Met LU St Pancras International
NR 30
30 King's Cross St. Pancras Tube LU London King's Cross
NR ?
30 King's Cross St. Pancras Tube LU St Pancras International
NR 30
? King's Cross St. Pancras Tube NR London King's Cross
LU 30
30 Leytonstone LU Leytonstone High Road
NR 30
30 Limehouse DLR Limehouse
NR 30
45 Liverpool Street LU London Liverpool Street
NR 30
30 London Bridge LU London Bridge
NR 30
30 London Fenchurch Street NR Monument
LU 30
30 London Fenchurch Street NR Tower Gateway
DLR 40
30 London Fenchurch Street NR Tower Hill
LU 40
30 London King's Cross NR St Pancras International
NR 30
30 London Marylebone NR Marylebone
LU 40
45 London Paddington NR Paddington
LU 30
30 Shadwell LU Shadwell
DLR 30
30 Sudbury Hill LU Sudbury Hill, Harrow
NR 30
30 Tottenham Hale LU Tottenham Hale
NR 30
30 Tower Gateway DLR Tower Hill
LU 30
30 Walthamstow Central LU Walthamstow Central
NR 30
30 Waterloo LU Waterloo W&C
LU 30
30 Waterloo Jubilee LU Waterloo W&C
LU 30
30 West Hampstead LU West Hampstead NLL
NR 30
30 West Hampstead LU West Hampstead Thameslink
NR 30
30 West Hampstead NLL NR West Hampstead Thameslink
NR 30
20 White City LU Wood Lane
LU 20

NR = National Rail
DLR = Docklands Light Railway
LU = London Underground

--
Walter Briscoe

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Walter Briscoe wrote:

In message of Tue, 18 Nov
2008 23:55:26 in uk.transport.london, Tom Anderson
writes
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Walter Briscoe wrote:

[snip]

They answered me, yesterday. Unfortunately, I can't copy the data un the
answer as they put the following in the reply: "Brief extracts of the
material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". I think they mistakenly refer to
the 1988 Act, but know nothing and may be wrong.

I imagine you're right. But: whilst they have copyright over the text of
the document, that doesn't cover the information within it - copyright is
over expressions, not ideas. Over the information, they (may) have a
database right, which stems from a bit of legislation that amended CDPA
1988, and did indeed come into force in 1998:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/19973032.htm

Which is all a bit mental and one of the bits of IP law i really don't
understand.

The words used are "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998 (sections 29 and
30)". You refer to a statutory instrument.

Yes - one which amends the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. The text in
it (the important bits, at least) became part of that act. Sections 29 and
30 of CDPA 1988 do indeed deal with fair dealing, and 29 was amended by
this order to cover databases.

The act was originally passed in 1988, but those amendments were made in
1998, and i hypothesise that this is the source of TfL's confused
terminology.

tom

--
uk.local groups TO BE RENAMED uk.lunatic.fringe groups

In message of Wed,
19 Nov 2008 17:34:43 in uk.transport.london, Tom Anderson
writes
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Walter Briscoe wrote:

[snip]

The words used are "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998 (sections
29 and 30)". You refer to a statutory instrument.

Yes - one which amends the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. The text
in it (the important bits, at least) became part of that act. Sections
29 and 30 of CDPA 1988 do indeed deal with fair dealing, and 29 was
amended by this order to cover databases.

The act was originally passed in 1988, but those amendments were made
in 1998, and i hypothesise that this is the source of TfL's confused
terminology.

Thanks! I now have a hypothesis to explain TfL's words.
--
Walter Briscoe

Walter - I suspect there may have a couple of versions of the document
doing the rounds, each based on the specific text of individual FOI
requests.

To give the background to how I got hold of it, within an hour or so
of the one Mike H FOIed landing in my inbox, the one with the times
landed in there from the TfL press office themselves.

I can only think that they believed (correctly as it turned out) that
one of the FOI copies would find its way onto the site anyway, so they
might as well be preemptive about it and send a copy themselves - even
if only to stop me badgering them about OSI confirmations.

Certainly looks to me like the copy they sent me was the "full"
version that they'd created for you (i've added your initials to the
"thanks" on the post).

Not sure if it helps you any, but I asked them if they were happy for
me to reprint in full and/or recast the data and they indicated (in
writing) that as long as I ran it with the TfL statement that's
included in the same post, they'd consider it reasonable usage.

If you feel there's any interesting points that should be made based
off your studies of the OSI it lists, or have any interpretations of
the data that you think would be useful to get out there, then I'd be
more than happy to run your conclusions on LR

John Bull