Versions Compared

Old Version 16

changes.mady.by.user Stephanie Chaufton

Saved on

compared with

New Version 17

changes.mady.by.user Teun Hendriks

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

1

Nevertheless, the large majority of modern in‑vehicle and backend systems are capable of handling OpenLR decoding for traffic updates without practical issues.

Rewording: Nevertheless, millions (green star) Agreed rewording: Notwithstanding the higher workload, millions of in‑vehicle and backend systems use OpenLR decoding for traffic updates without practical issues.

DS: I did not receive any confirmation from the car industry that this is the case

VW does not use OpenLR

Mercedes Audi, Stellantis, BMW, Kia use it. 


2Maybe we can convert one specific TMC-segment (a segment of 3 TMC-points) to an OpenLR-segment as an example how to proceed

Need a example, TMC location codes, TMC labeling of road segments, and a generated OpenLR code.

TH: Let's see whether an example on USA maps can be generated. 


3It may be worth to also mention, that it requires a model of the road network (i.e., not only a map in the sense of a picture/drawing) to encode and decode OpenLR. This is an obstacle (and is often misunderstood) for a public authority who is not also the creator of maps/digial road networks. (TMDL)


(green star) Explain this. Make workflow recommendation, with migration start from digital map, and parallel generate both TMC and OpenLR location reference, not first TMC LR then TMC decoding on map, then OpenLR encoding.  


4A question, maybe for discussion in the WG: Should a road authority without a TMC or TPEG service continue to maintain a TMC location code set for their road network after a transition to OpenLR? What are arguments for and against? (TMDL)→ discussion item for the next telco 

...