Table of Contents - APTAStandards.com

and 5-2. The lack of existing implementation
was the only drawback for this
specification, resulting in a less favorable rating
in the “Widely Implemented” category.
Overall, ITSO is highly applicable to the UTFS.
Although VEI scored as favorably in the technical compliance category, it did not
receive any scoring on the UTFS Adoption Costs
and Adoption Time. This is because
there is no definitive fee structure,
or change request schedule that could be identified
by the Agent Systems point of contact.
If APTA were interested in pursuing VEI,
detailed
discussions with Agent Systems
to determine these elements would be
necessary. This specification scored as somewhat favorable in the UTFS Effort Required
category, for the following reasons:
• The level of effort required further defining and
mapping
all t he matching VEI
dialogues to
WP4
proposed
exact
message
types
• The
estimated number
of additional
data
elements
that need to be defined for
smart card related transaction processing
Compared to Exhibit 5-1, the VEI scored better in terms of relevance per Exhibit 5-2.
OFX did not score as favorably because it lacks relevance to the transit industry. This
adversely affects its score in all the other categories as well, and therefore, is the least
applicable to UTFS efforts. It is gaining rapid acceptance in other industries (e.g.
Financial) and support from major vendors such as Microsoft. APTA should consider
this specification as it matures and becomes more widely adopted.
Although incomplete, the CID Edge Interfaces scored very favorably in terms of
Adoption Costs and Adoption Time. This specification is a viable candidate for a model
for WP4 efforts, due to its reliance on Workpackage 1 smart card data formats, and the
relatively low adoption cost to UTFS. Its low score on Technical Compliance reflected
adversely on the Level of UTFS Effort Required
in implementing this specification.
CID
Edge Interfaces
also scored very favorable on two of the three categories in Exhibit 5-2.
Despite its low scores on Technical Compliance
and UTFS Effort Required, WP4 should
consider
using this draft specification.
TransLink is the most favorable specification in terms of technical compliance. It fulfills
most of the criteria established in this category
by
providing a match for all the message
types proposed by the WP4. Its compliance with
the technical criteria also reduces the
time required for APTA to adopt this specification
because of the relatively smaller
number of changes that need to be undertaken.
Due to its regional and smart card based
focus, TransLink also scored the highest in Exhibit 5-2. If APTA will be allowed to
adopt this specification, TransLink should certainly
be considered for WP4 efforts.
ERG APTA specifications scored very favorably in all categories
of the criteria. Its
support for relatively fewer number of WP4 proposed messages resulted in a
“Favorable” ranking in both the Technical Complian ce and the Level of UTFS Effort
Page 78