WZDx Specification Subgroup Meeting Notes, 2019 11 12 - usdot-jpo-ode/wzdx GitHub Wiki

Virtual Attendees

  • Nate Desmukh-Towery - Volpe
  • Mahsa Ettefagh - Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Amy Tram - ICF
  • Justin Anderson - Noblis
  • Chuck Felice - Utah Dept. of Transportation
  • Joseph Kuenzi - Oregon DOT
  • Rashmi Brewer and Daniel Rokenbrodt (MnDOT)
  • Derald Dudley - USDOT
  • Jacob Brady (KCUS - Consultant to MassDOT)
  • Skylar Knickerbocker - Iowa State University
  • Drew Clark - KYTC
  • David Craig - GM
  • Ariel Gold - USDOT
  • Serge Beaudry-Ver-MAc
  • Tom Lee, Mapbox
  • Rachel Ostroff, ICF
  • Aaron Antrim & Heidi Guenin - Trillium
  • Rob Hoyler - TomTom
  • Siva Narla, ITE
  • Sinclair Stolle - Iowa DOT
  • Amy Nelson - US DOT
  • Qassim Abdullah - Woolpert, Inc.
  • Dan Sprengeler - Iowa DOT
  • Julia Lien - Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Theresa Gaisser - FAST/ RTCSNV
  • Ashley Spurlock - Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Polly Okunieff - (ICF)
  • Eric Ricciardi - Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Tomas Guerra - OZ Engineering Phoenix, AZ
  • Faisal Saleem - Maricopa County DOT
  • Craig Moore - Seattle DOT
  • Brian Delsey
  • Jeff Loftus - FMCSA
  • Rob Hoyler
  • Wesley Alford
  • Tom DiNardo
  • Tomas Guerra
  • Dan Farley

Presentation Slides can be accessed [here]

Purpose and Intended Outcomes:

  • Discuss new developments on the remaining pull requests
  • Address any concerns regarding the rationale behind final v2 changes
  • Encourage GitHub participation during this period of heightened activity

Agenda

  • Sign in and Welcome
  • Group Discussion – Remaining Pull Requests
  • Group Discussion – Alternative Pull Requests
  • Action Items and Next Steps

Discussion Summary PR#50 - Use Relational Data Modeling Techniques to design the content of the Work Zone Data Specification

  • Derald did a live run-through and explanation of pull request #50 and its implication on the specification - including the GitHub changes he made, e.g., the addition of new tables (lanes [New]) and the modification of existing tables
  • Went through the data model at a high-level
  • Clarified the distinction/similarity between using the terms “work zone activity” versus “road event” per the pull request
  • Questions about validating the model against various geographic configurations
  • Clarify that we plan to validate the model in PR #50 against the most common geometries used to validate v1, lining up assistance from others to do the validation before voting

PR#44 - Mobility Impact and Lane Level Impacts + Restrictions

  • Craig ran through pull request #44 live on GitHub, and how it rolls up to Derald’s pull request #50
  • Skylar mentioned that #44 addresses the problem of not being able to say that multiple lanes are closed, open, shifted. Allows us to do individual lane restrictions. Gives us additional flexibility and drill down to specific details.
  • Will fully flesh this out with some enumeration values and vote on pull request #50 – if we don’t move forward with #50, we’ll come back to #44
  • Should we add ‘unknown’ as an option if ‘event_vehicle_impact’ is a required enumeration

PR#40 and Issue: 41- Add Support for Location Geometry

  • Ran through how this ties in to pull request #50
  • Clarified that the data model is more of a set of logical requirements rather than a schema
  • #40 and #41 are combined to make this easy for consumption for mapping companies

Action Items and Next Steps

  • Participate in the GitHub discussions and provide feedback on the issues/pull requests.
  • Cast your ‘yes/no/neutral’ votes on GitHub once announcement emails go out (exact voting period will be specified in the email).