Web Conference 2025.07.15 Curb - openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification GitHub Wiki

CDS Working Group

Agenda

Final CDS 1.1 Items

Organizers

  • Hosts: Michael Schnuerle, OMF
  • Note Taker: Michael Schnuerle, OMF
  • Facilitator: Michael Schnuerle, OMF
  • Outreach: Michael Schnuerle, OMF

Action Items and Decisions

  • Update linestring draft to clarify "polygon preferred, linestring acceptable" (done)
  • For Push Events, clarify deduplication using Event ID in spec (done)
  • Some final PRs already discussed added by July 16

Minutes

Notes

Release Plan

  • CDS 1.1 Release schedule and finalization
  • a third complete, many ready to be marked complete
  • Release draft July/Aug, approved Sept

High priority issues

Linestring addition

  • Option for 1 dimensional line instead of 2 dimensional polygon.
  • How can this be done where it's not breaking?
  • Currently drafted as either/or for 1.1
  • Breaking because 1.0 devs would be expecting polygon, then get polyline.
  • If you don't know the width, you can extrapolate a typical 10' polygon or maybe 6" line into CDS 1.0

Conversation:

  • Jacob, CurbIQ: haven't been making polygons. Prefer to have linestring, but can do with polygon until 2.0
  • Oliver, Montréal: also generate linestring, ok to wait for 2.0
  • Rick, Umojo: wouldn't break their processes internally. They measure spaces, not zones. Would be nice to have the zone width. For other lanes we would want 2 dimensions of each lane, not line string.
  • Michael, Passport: could be non breaking? Still is a geometry, so could be ok. Generating a width might be bad data. We support lines and polygons now.
  • Oliver, Montréal: maybe not breaking since it's still GeoJSON libraries
  • Michael, OMF: you'd have to choose one based on current draft. Can't do line and polygon. Could say "polygon preferred, linestring acceptable." John, Minneapolis agrees
  • Oliver, Montréal: evolution from line to polygon, like you are evolving

Push for Events

  • Getting events to agencies more efficiently, less overhead, less data transfer, less processing, more real time
  • Would be an option for agencies, to push or pull, like MDS.
  • Michael, Passport: less overhead, confirms agency gets this data
  • Rick, Umojo/Michael, Passport: connection issues? Push guarantees delivery, can attempt delivery. Don't want to prescribe the how here in MDS, but provide the blueprint for this instead.
  • Michael, OMF needs to check MDS language to make sure it's clear, noted correctly
  • Matt, Populus: I agree that that’s an implementation detail. There will always be outages in each direction and organizations need to have protocols for handling those, but we don’t need to dictate those.
  • Want to support errors correctly, deduplication clarity using Event ID in spec.
  • Many agencies have both push and pull available, for these reasons.
  • Matt, Populus: usually communicates with push provider to push again after an email. Usually from outage on provider side. But I do prefer a pull to be able to check and get data, since the vendor is in control.
  • Nivel in Norway cities do push and pull. Seattle is using push and pull.

Other issues

  • Rick, Umojo: PRs added tomorrow, July 16. Can add them to 1.1, but if they need discussion then it might be a 1.2 release, which would be faster than 1.1. Probably before a 2.0.
  • Rick on zones with street number in addition to street name, updated tomorrow. Using TIGER.
    • Make sure to name it appropriately, per comments at last meeting.

Chat

  • 00:05:14 Aylene McCallum (OMF): Hi everyone! My name is Aylene McCallum - I'm the Director of Partnerships & Development at the OMF. Thank you for attending today!

  • 00:05:35 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Agenda: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/wiki/Web-Conference-2025.07.15-Curb

  • 00:06:17 Michael Danko (Passport): Hi everyone, there's a lot of familiar names but a bunch I haven't met yet. My name is Michael and I am a product owner of shared & data services here at Passport.

  • 00:06:40 Graham Rossmore (LADOT Parking): hi everyone, Graham Rossmore here from LADOT's Parking Meters Division. Excited to be part of the steering committee!

  • 00:07:00 Rick Neubauer (Umojo): Hi Everyone!

  • 00:07:03 Wei Cheng （JC-Techs）: Hi， Wei Cheng here from JC-Techs

  • 00:08:21 Rick Neubauer (Umojo): Snapshots too

  • 00:08:27 Em Burnett (OMF): Reacted to "Hi everyone, there's..." with 👋

  • 00:08:32 Em Burnett (OMF): Reacted to "hi everyone, Graham ..." with 👋

  • 00:08:40 Em Burnett (OMF): Reacted to "Hi， Wei Cheng here f..." with 👋

  • 00:08:54 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Getting Started https://www.openmobilityfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Getting-Started-with-CDS.pdf

  • 00:09:43 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Release Plan https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/wiki/Release-1.1.0

  • 00:12:24 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): 1.1 items still open: https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/milestone/4

  • 00:14:06 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Linestring https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/pull/171

  • 00:26:03 John Lundstrom (Minneapolis): I support that note, polygon preferred but segment accepted.

  • 00:26:13 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Reacted to "I support that note,..." with 👍🏼

  • 00:26:54 Jacob Malleau (CurbIQ): Fine with me!

  • 00:28:41 Michael Danko (Passport): A polygon would provide higher fidelity data but this change seems to be in the spirit of capturing as much accurate data as possible.

  • 00:29:05 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: Reacted to "A polygon would prov..." with 👍🏻

  • 00:29:07 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: Reacted to "I support that note,..." with 👍🏼

  • 00:35:32 Matt Davis (Populus): Reacted to "A polygon would prov..." with 👍🏻

  • 00:37:21 Matt Davis (Populus): I agree that that’s an implementation detail. There will always be outages in each direction and organizations need to have protocols for handling those, but we don’t need to dictate those.

  • 00:37:47 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: Reacted to "I agree that that’s ..." with 👍🏻

  • 00:39:28 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Events Push pull request. Need to check on de-duplication and any other supporting language we may need to clarify things. https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/pull/180

  • 00:42:49 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: We just started doing Push + Pull with Umojo + CurbIQ

  • 00:43:06 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Reacted to "We just started doin..." with 👍🏼

  • 00:43:10 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: Replying to "We just started doin..."

  • Going live on Friday I believe

  • 00:49:15 Brian Hamlin | Seattle DOT: I need to drop. Thanks all and thanks Michael for facilitating

  • 00:49:20 Michael Schnuerle (OMF): Reacted to "I need to drop. Than..." with 👍🏼

  • 00:52:25 Olivier Audet-AMD Montreal: thanks everyone!

  • 00:52:26 John Lundstrom (Minneapolis): Thank you! Excellent progress made.