Roadmap discussion

[dabreegster]

v1

This will be a small and simple open tool. The main purpose will be to generate quick and consistent geographic data representing planned area, route and crossing interventions. We could add another 'other' category of interventions but this has not been firmed up.

• Update the attribute data form (Robin leading on this)
• Polish up UI and remove non-essential attribute table iteams
• List schemes in left sidebar (not just on the map), filter by things like how much info has been filled out
• Add a free-form "other" category, for stuff like cycle hangars?
• Add landing page that lets people 'Selelctize' their region from LADs and TAs, to focus in on the local region

v2

To be developed when more developer time allocated to project. Focus will be on improving user experience and supporting good designs.

Below issues are just a sketch for discussion. See issues for the single source of truth on v2 roadmap: https://github.com/acteng/atip/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3Av2 and source of truth on planned timeline: https://github.com/orgs/acteng/projects/1/views/1

• allow users to switch basemap (satellite imagery layer included March 2023)
• inclusion of attribute data based on an agreed taxonomy: Update with new fields and possible values from agreed taxonomy of active travel interventions #117
• better area draw tool, snapping to roads, railways, bodies of water, this is really good now: Improve route snapper functionality #25
• Snapping for areas? Not a must have but possibility: Polygon snapping? #118
• better route draw tool (improve the snapping prototype and make it work everywhere)
• enable routes to be split into sections of the same cross-section Route splitting #119
• undo/redo everywhere Undo/redo #44
• Provide better instructions for how to use everything (including how to email the resulting geojson files around when the wider processes that ATIP will contribute to become known), when things become more stable and the deluge of changes stops Improve instructions #116

v3

Collaboration possibilities are the key feature here. This stage represents a big step up in terms of scale of the project because of authentication issues.

• additional evidence layers, e.g. bus stops, LTNs from bikedata etc. Additional data layers #120
• manage multiple layers (existing infra, different schemes) with version history
• login / account management
• commenting on schemes with threaded conversations
• upload pictures, PDFs, other supporting documents
• embed streetview

v4

Think spelling autocorrect but for street design. The features here would discourage common mistakes in design and move towards auto-evaluation withing the platform.

• codifying scoring criteria for schemes and automating assessment
• figuring out data sources and UI around the "will it fit" check and splitting a route into pieces
• Enrich with secondary datasets, such as historic collisions, air quality, and traffic volumes, to further guide interventions and assessment
• Sharing with others

v5

Advanced features that would require most time to develop.

• bidirectional OSM<->ATIP sync
• sophisticated authenticated login and management
• data audit
• Explore plugin architecture and links to other tools such as streetmix

Not decided

• import/export areas from A/B Street LTN tool

[dabreegster]

30 Nov is the deadline for v1, right? The stuff listed there now is very achievable. Can I confirm that nice snapping tools for routes / areas are not needed in the next month? They're harder, so if they're necessary, I need to rejuggle other stuff

[Robinlovelace]

30 Nov is the deadline for v1, right? The stuff listed there now is very achievable. Can I confirm that nice snapping tools for routes / areas are not needed in the next month? They're harder, so if they're necessary, I need to rejuggle other stuff

I don't think snapping routes/areas is needed for v1. Could be good to have a development deployment for testing new features, and those are indeed really cool features that serve an important purpose by highlighting the direction of travel. But not needed for v1 IMO.

[dabreegster]

Deployment for v1 is a great question. Are we rolling this out to a few authorities to test, or is this going to everyone in a month? If the latter, I would raise the standards and not just deploy to github. We can at least put a stable build on S3 or something (for literal cents in cost for our tiny scale).

[Robinlovelace]

This is now largely captured in https://github.com/acteng/atip/milestones but worth keeping this open for any ideas/questions.

[dabreegster]

I don't want to directly edit the v2 milestone that's there now because there's not really change tracking on it, so discussing here first.

I would vote to strike import/export areas from A/B Street LTN tool -- this was a much older idea, and being able to draw areas using the route tool (in progress at https://github.com/dabreegster/route_snapper/tree/cordon) covers this much more elegantly.

I'd also like to defer undo/redo support; it's too complex to rush by May 1 and not as valuable as other things.

Instead, I'd say we start trying out something real for #69. We could aim at least for very easy metrics (like speed limits) and add OSM amenities, categorized in whatever way Inspections finds useful.

And a meta question: what's the source of truth for v2's scope? Is it issues tagged, https://github.com/acteng/atip/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3Av2? Or the checklist at https://github.com/acteng/atip/milestone/2? Having both is confusing; can I remove the checklist from the milestone description? And maybe mention the intended audience of v2 is Inspections dogfooding things

[robinlovelace-ate]

I would vote to strike import/export areas from A/B Street LTN tool -- this was a much older idea, and being able to draw areas using the route tool (in progress at https://github.com/dabreegster/route_snapper/tree/cordon) covers this much more elegantly.

👍 to that, forgot about this place to discuss the roadmap and glad to see it being used. I think it will be good if we keep the top level summary more-or-less up-to-date and with links to issues. To that end I've created #116 which corresponds to one of those v2 bullets and will set it to v2 with a label.

[robinlovelace-ate]

All open v2 issues now tracked in issue tracker. I've shifted the data layer one to v3 for now as it will take a long time to define/build/integrate them and not a priority, yet, although this is hugely important for the long term aim of making ATIP a one stop shop for active travel planning. So would be open to making this v2 again: #120