EPISODE

2.7.3 Statement No 3, dated 23rd September 1996

Preamble:

These statements are provided as an indication of the Project perceptions at the time of issue; they should be used in the historical context, as dated and should not necessarily be seen as a continuing belief or understanding.

The Pan-European Management of TMC Location Databases

1. Introduction

The location code database is central to the operation of any TMC system, providing - in essence - one of the two main keys to the encoding and decoding of data (the other being the event list). This statement reviews the function of the database, identifies the roles and responsibilities of its owner, and makes recommendations which will enable the rapid development of a pan-European system with fair competition between operators.

2. Location database influences

In any TMC system it is necessary for the same location database information to be used at all Traffic Information Centres (TICs), by all Service Providers and by all devices which receive information from those sources. Such a system is depicted in Figure 1, which introduces the role of a Card Provider, translating the available database to a physical and marketable form. If any of the system elements has a database which differs from the others, then performance will be less than optimal. For example, if the receiver were to have an old database, missing new location codes, then messages relating to these locations cannot be received and announced to the motorist. Such omission may be regarded as simply unfortunate, but could have major safety implications.

3. Location database ownership

Within the system described above there can only be one database per area/country, and all system elements (TIC, SP, Card Provider and User) must derive their individual databases from this one source. It is not possible for more than one location database to be used within this system, whereas it is possible for TICs, Service Providers, Card Providers and Receiver Manufacturers to operate competitively. Clearly, the owner of the Location Database is, and must be, in a monopoly situation.

If fair competition and reasonable access is to be given to all operators, providers and manufacturers it is imperative that strict regulations and guidelines are imposed on database owners. We believe that such databases should be owned by non-profit making organisations, preferably by public authorities, and maintained by contractors. Costs may be offset by reasonable charges for acquisition of the database, which may be licensed for a period (to maintain system integrity) to operators, service providers and card providers.

4. Location database maintenance

The task of the Database Owner is to provide a fully maintained database, accessible on fair and equal terms to all who may request it, and updated at regular and declared intervals. In order to ensure that all system components are kept to the latest possible standard, it will be necessary for database owners to declare in advance when a new update is to be made available; so that, for example, Card Providers may ensure that mass production is suitably synchronised.

5. Distribution of the database

The pan-European vision of TMC foresees that a traveller can buy or rent a smart card in Italy which has location codes for London, but with events pronounced in Italian. Such a card needs to be assembled using information derived from the UK database. This principle extends all over Europe, and it is clear that each database needs to be made very widely available.

Technical standards for information exchange need to be developed, such that any potential operator/supplier can obtain information from any database owner. Possibly the best way of achieving such interchangeability is to use ODBC (Open Data Base Communication) protocols, which will permit operators to derive whole or defined subsets of a database at ease. For example - just locations in the north-east of France.

As memory sizes increase, so card providers will wish to market products which cover larger geographical areas, and it will be possible and necessary to include locations derived from more than one location database. Clearly there are distinct advantages in encouraging database owners to synchronise their updates, so that it is possible to manufacture products containing the latest information from several sources. Such a situation is depicted in Figure 2. With such an aim in mind the need for a non profit-making European database exchange organisation should be considered, which co-ordinates and collects information from individual database owners, and makes this available to all - subject to appropriate licences being issued.

6. Recommendations

6.1	That a single Database Owner should be recognised in each area/country. The owner must be a monopoly and should be non profit-making (preferably a public body). The owner will make the database available to all organisations on fair and equal terms, subject to licences for use being issued. The owner may subcontract maintenance and distribution functions.
6.2	Each database will need to be maintained, and such maintenance should be conducted at periodic and defined dates, to enable all system components to operate with a common, and latest version.
6.3	Products and systems operating with data derived from the database need to be licensed for a fixed interval to ensure quality of service. This will mean that cards produced for receivers will need to have an expiry date.
6.4	All databases need to be made available electronically in a common and technically standard manner, preferably using open database communication (ODBC) protocols.

Figure 1: Location Database Influence Diagram

Figure 2: Card Provider - Location Database Information Sources (partial example)

PREVIOUS PAGE			NEXT PAGE
HOME	CONTENTS	SPLIT SCREEN	FULL SCREEN