In message <lf99rgpbukuim8nu145rl20na5rm0jv39a@4ax.com>, at 14:06:13 on
Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 08:42:17 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <fkg6rg5n2nql0rhoc9kddc6r6f1ejhkm1m@4ax.com>, at 12:13:41 on
>>Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>
>>>I don't know. A simple QR code would be the most sensible option,
>>>because that can be delivered by any mechanism and displayed on any
>>>device
>>
>>Not much use when my ITSO card hasn't got a screen!
>
>That's not a mobile device, though.

But it's still an m-ticket (I think), more so than an e-ticket I think.

>>>(and, as a last resort, can be printed, even if you have to
>>>screenshot it to do so).
>>
>>I think some TOCs expressly forbid screenshots. As an anti-cloning
>>measure I think.
>
>You can't prevent it completely.

You might fool some ticket inspectors but not all, especially if the
in-app rendering has some kind of cunning moving watermark.

>>>Given the choice between email and an app, I'd choose email because
>>>that Just Plain Works without me needing to install another app,
>>
>>But to get a reasonable experience on my phone (and after much
>>discussion and recommendation here) I've had to install a new email app.
>>
>>>and having been sent to me it's accessible on any device I own
>>
>>Only if that's how your email is set up. Most people I know with
>>smartphones can't (or don't seen able to) access the email they
>>send/recive on that, at home on a PC.
>
>I think your bubble is very atypical.

"Bubble" isn't quite the right word. I spend a lot of time observing how
the general public uses IT. What people "close to me" use is only a
small subset of that.

For example, if I see someone taking a photo of a non-functional TVM,
I'm quite likely to engage them in conversation. And mostly they seem
happy to unburden themselves.

>>What sort of closed group of vendors do you expect to have registered to
>>your WhatsApp?
>
>If they have a Business WhatsApp account and are using the API, I don't
>need to have them registered in my WhatsApp. All I need to do is supply
>them with my phone number.

I have yet to encounter such a business (in any capacity).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sp7sjr$knq$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:32:59 on Mon, 13 Dec
> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sovdt9$qpk$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:32:57 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sotnpl$664$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:09:25 on Thu, 9 Dec 2021,
>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <soo710$nau$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:52:32 on Tue, 7 Dec 2021,
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If rail tickets were the only ecommerce product I ever bought, it
>>>>>>>>> might, just, be acceptable. But given that I buy from perhaps a
>>>>>>>>> hundred, it's a bit rich for whatever ATOC/Fat-Controller is called
>>>>>>>>> this week to expect me to bend over backwards for *their* convenience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Far better, if we got back to the hear of this thread, they could be
>>>>>>>>> bothered to keep their ticket machines operational, or provide PERTIS
>>>>>>>>> machines, so passengers weren't forced to buy at the last minute using
>>>>>>>>> their mobile, stood in the rain in the station car park, on pain of a
>>>>>>>>> £100 fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You need to get yourself organised, oh, and an umbrella. Personally if
>>>>>>>> it is pouring with rail I'd do the on-line ordering before I got out of
>>>>>>>> the car.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I don't know the TVM is broken until I get to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you buy your tickets at home/in the car it really doesn’t
>>>>>> matter if the
>>>>>> TVM is working or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only if the flow actually *has* e-tickets available.
>>>>>
>>>>> But you've lost track of the reason for this debate: it's the
>>>>> circumstances that you arrive at the station to find that the TVM you
>>>>> wanted to buy a paper ticket from is broken, and next to it is a big
>>>>> hectoring sign all abut £100 fines for travelling without a ticket.
>>>>>
>>>>> With one of the most common rail tickets I buy being £1.90, it's really
>>>>> not proportionate to be ordering them in advance from home.
>>>>>
>>>>> What would be your reaction when boarding a bus if the driver said
>>>>> "sorry, my ticket machine is broken, you must go back home and buy a
>>>>> ticket there first". (And of course the next bus isn't until an hour
>>>>> later).
>>>>
>>>> Do you have any evidence that that’s what the TOC’s response would be if
>>>> you boarded the train without a ticket because the TVM was broken?
>>>
>>> It's not an equivalent situation…
>>
>> So why on earth did you bring it up?
>
> Because "go home and buy a ticket" is what the station signage is in
> effect saying. And with rail tickets generally cheaper than bus tickets
> in East Cambs, they are more likely to be used as a substitute for buses
> than in some other parts of the country.

So you think it is an equivalent situation, then…

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spa1a0$stp$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:05:20 on Tue, 14 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> The original query was why can’t you accept a pdf ticket emailed to you.
>> *if* that flow doesn’t have an e-ticket the matter stops there, as there’s
>> nothing to email.
>
> Which brings us back to *my* original query, which is about the railways
> having compulsory ticket zones, upping the penalty to a whopping £100,
> and yet making no effort to make it less likely that you'll be failed by
> their ticketing systems.

Despite the lack of any kind of hard evidence that the railways would
impose whopping penalties on anyone faced with the genuine inability to buy
a ticket.

>> *assuming* there is an e-ticket to be emailed you then argued you
>> couldn’t manage an emailed ticket
>
> I've consistently argued how non-user-friendly it is to email pdfs to a
> hone.

And hardly anyone here has accepted your arguments.

I have no comment to make about the rest of your message.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:40:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <spaivj$1j6$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:00 on Tue, 14 Dec
>2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>You can perfectly well view PDFs with no Adobe software installed.
>
>That's true, although the rail ticketing sites direct you very strongly
>towards using Adobe. Maybe that's something else they ought to review?

I think the point is that Acrobat is both cross-platform and a dedicated
PDF viewer, whereas other apps may only work for one or the other
platform and other cross-platform apps, while they may do PDF as a
secondary function, are not aimed specifically at that use case. So
suggesting that customers install Acrobat is probably the simplest way
of helping those who do not already have a PDF viewer installed, because
the TOCs know it will work for everybody.

Mark

On 14/12/2021 19:12, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spa1a0$stp$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:05:20 on Tue, 14 Dec
>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> The original query was why can’t you accept a pdf ticket emailed to you.
>>> *if* that flow doesn’t have an e-ticket the matter stops there, as there’s
>>> nothing to email.
>>
>> Which brings us back to *my* original query, which is about the railways
>> having compulsory ticket zones, upping the penalty to a whopping £100,
>> and yet making no effort to make it less likely that you'll be failed by
>> their ticketing systems.
>
> Despite the lack of any kind of hard evidence that the railways would
> impose whopping penalties on anyone faced with the genuine inability to buy
> a ticket.

They don't need to. They just need to make people believe the railway
is a customer-hostile organisation, where you get fined £100 for not
holding something unobtainable, and they'll get back in their cars.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Railway ticketing is fundamentally broken due the now Byzantine fare
>>> structure, which nobody seems willing to reform. No amount of fiddling with
>>> user interfaces is going to fix that.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And don't forget that the majority of it, still, was inherited from BR.
>>
>> The problem is that any deep reform to fix it (eg, starting again from a
>> blank sheet with no reference to existing fares) is going to have some
>> winners (now with cheaper fares) and some losers (now with more expensive
>> fares) [1], and you can bet which will make headlines and which won't.
>>
>> [1] unless accompanied by a reversal of the 'transfer cost from taxpayer to
>> farebox' policy
>>
>
> I’m not sure I buy the BR argument. Pre privatisation we had singles,
> returns, off peak returns and savers (Intercity to London). More
> importantly, the price differences between them were reasonable. Now
> returns have become Anytimes and are eye wateringly priced (£170 for 100
> miles to London).

In the absence of a single event which raised certain fares, the whole
system is an evolution of the BR fare system. And the (average) annual
increase of regulated fares is mandated by the government!

It's also worth remembering that government policy for many years has been
to move costs from the taxpayer to the farebox.

> And there was none of this Advance ticket rubbish that
> restricts you to a given train.

BR introduced those.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree that emailed pdf tickets can be convenient. However I received
>> well over 4,000 emails during August and that's when they become
>> inconvenient as it relies on me being at home to either forward to a
>> specific email address on my phone or to ftp them there. Searching
>> through so many emails on a phone is just not viable.
>>
>> Even using a specific email address for ticket providers is not viable
>> as I'm illegally on two email lists neither of which provide the legally
>> required link to remove myself for the same.
>>
>> I even get emails from a ToC whom I've had no business agreement with
>> apart from travelling on their services. I can tell from the email
>> address they use exactly who provided it to them.
>>
>>
> Can’t you just get the unwanted emails auto junked by a suitable filter
> configured server side?
> There’s also nothing to stop you having an entirely different email
> account, with a separate inbox for tickets. Most email clients handle
> multiple accounts.
>

Perhaps something like martinstickets-at-hotmail-co-uk and access it
through the hotmail website…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/12/2021 13:32, Tweed wrote:
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Railway ticketing is fundamentally broken due the now Byzantine fare
>>>>>>> structure, which nobody seems willing to reform. No amount of fiddling with
>>>>>>> user interfaces is going to fix that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And don't forget that the majority of it, still, was inherited from BR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that any deep reform to fix it (eg, starting again from a
>>>>>> blank sheet with no reference to existing fares) is going to have some
>>>>>> winners (now with cheaper fares) and some losers (now with more expensive
>>>>>> fares) [1], and you can bet which will make headlines and which won't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] unless accompanied by a reversal of the 'transfer cost from taxpayer to
>>>>>> farebox' policy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m not sure I buy the BR argument. Pre privatisation we had singles,
>>>>> returns, off peak returns and savers (Intercity to London). …
>>>>
>>>> Blue and white savers, ISTR. And route specific special offers - I once
>>>> got caught with a £10 excess for using a cheap Birmingham to Edinburgh
>>>> ticket via Carlisle rather than Newcastle. I’d used the right train on the
>>>> way south but just hopped on the first Edinburgh train on the way back.
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but you got an excess (assuming you use the term in its correct
>>> technical sense), not your whole ticket disregarded and made to pay again.
>>> My main gripe is the Advance ticket, which needlessly ties you to a single
>>> train, with draconian penalties if you get on the wrong service. The
>>> relatively low cost of Advance fares is always trotted out as justification
>>> when the high cost of flexible tickets is complained about.
>>>
>>
>> If you don't like advance fares, don't buy one. No-one is forcing you
>> to. Meanwhile very many people find them very useful.
>>
>
> My objection to them is they are used to justify the high price of flexible
> fares. Off peak fares are high, with the justification that you can always
> buy an Advance.
>
>

The ideal, presumably, would be to average them out; reducing the expensive
fares by increasing the cheap ones. You know which would get more
headlines…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 04/12/2021 15:35, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 04/12/2021 15:07, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>
>>> Even using a specific email address for ticket providers is not viable
>>> as I'm illegally on two email lists neither of which provide the
>>> legally required link to remove myself for the same.
>>
>> Of course it is viable, how long does it take to set up a specific email
>> address for the purpose?
>
> Not long. But it becomes usable when the junk email builds up.
>

tickets2020@…
tickets2021@…
tickets2022@…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <soer6b$iu7$5@dont-email.me>, at 04:35:24 on Sat, 4 Dec 2021,
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sodc51$dto$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:12:33 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sod3bh$faq$3@dont-email.me>, at 12:42:25 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 03/12/2021 12:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <socvtm$nti$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:43:50 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 03/12/2021 11:14, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <socqrg$o9u$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:20 on Fri, 3 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <soaejt$u8h$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:36:14 on Thu, 2
>>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2021,
>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> People might get caught out less these days, because when the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine is broken I often saw them taking a photo with their
>>>>>>>>>>>>> phone (no, m-tickets
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For which journeys, for example?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (I've just done a test almost-purchase of an Ely-Cambridge return
>>>>>>>>>>>> e-ticket, for example).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried Ely-Brandon just now, and the options are
>>>>>>>>>>> Collection, Smartcard or Emailed pdf. As discussed before, I
>>>>>>>>>>> have issues regarding an emailed pdf as fully an m-ticket
>>>>>>>>>>> (although it does qualify as an e-ticket I suppose).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ely to Liverpool St, only offers Collection (not even ITSO
>>>>>>>>>>> collection).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ely to Kings Cross or Kings Lynn, nothing if not inconsistent
>>>>>>>>>>> (although the KGX ticket would also be valid to LST!)
>>>>>>>>>>> Collection and PDF [so much for GTR's franchise commitment to
>>>>>>>>>>> roll ITSO out across their whole network by about four years ago].
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What’s your objection to an emailed pdf?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This was discussed at great length a few months ago.
>>>>>>>>> Mainly the need for the email to be sent to a phone, which requires
>>>>>>>>> an account with the ticket vendor which has such an email address
>>>>>>>>> associated with it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that is a problem how?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because the accounts I have with ticket booking sites are currently
>>>>>>> associated with email addresses which are delivered to my desktop, not
>>>>>>> my phone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why? You seem to delight in making life unnecessarily complicated for
>>>>>> yourself and then blaming others for the inconvenience it causes you.
>>>>>
>>>>> What would be unnecessarily complicated would be for me to have routine
>>>>> e-tickets delivered to my phone, because then I'd need to forward them
>>>>> either to my desktop (which is my preferred audit trail for this kind of
>>>>> thing, and also the appliance with a printer, which my phone isn't) or
>>>>> to the person who I bought the ticket for (which is at least half of my
>>>>> purchases).
>>>>
>>>> Why can't your phone access the same email accounts as your desktop?
>>>
>>> Because the majority of my email is held on POP3 accounts that the
>>> client can't access, nor would I want it to. It would be overwhelmed.
>>
>> Can't you have an email client on your phone to access the one one specific
>> POP3 account which you tickets get delivered to?
>
> That would mean having a special account for tickets, and apart from
> having to go round all my Apps and browsers changing the login
> credentials, why should I have to, when other much less clunky ways of
> delivering tickets ought to be possible.
>
> Talking of clunky, I parked my car at a station recently, and the
> payment scheme wasn't any of the several apps I've had to set up (almost
> all of them subsequently only to be used once) and the ticket machine
> was very cumbersome. They clearly expect people to learn about it from
> experience, rather than actually having a decent user interface. Good
> news is, the screen was readable, the one at a hospital I visited a
> couple of years ago the backlight appeared to be broken, and in the
> absence of any street lighting, it was impossible to use without a
> torch.
>

Doesn't everyone carry a torch in their pocket these days?

> Anyway back at the station, rather than issue an actual ticket it did
> everything by ANPR, and had a somewhat hectoring: "You have overstayed
> by 7hrs, that will be £5". But I hadn't overstayed, I was wanting a
> day-ticket (which is £5). Luckily I was driving my own car, so I knew
> the registration number; had it been my wife's I would have no idea.
> Overall it was about a dozen "clicks", whatever happened to machines
> with a big button on the front which you press once for a day-ticket?
>

Too much fraud and/or too many staff required to enforce.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sokpoq$ojr$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:47:52 on Mon, 6 Dec 2021,
> Bob <email@domain.com> remarked:
>> On 2021-12-04 04:35:24 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>> Why can't your phone access the same email accounts as your
>>>>> desktop?
>>>> Because the majority of my email is held on POP3 accounts that the
>>>> client can't access, nor would I want it to. It would be overwhelmed.
>>>>
>>> Can't you have an email client on your phone to access the one one
>>> specific POP3 account which you tickets get delivered to?
>>
>> The problem with POP3 is that it is designed around the idea that when
>> an email client downloads a message, it is no longer available on the
>> server.
>
> I wasn't attempting to contrast POP3 with IMAP, rather with webmail. But
> in any event, POP3 has a "keep on server" option.
>

You can access both POP3 and IMAP using webmail, so I'm entirely lost now
as to what point you were trying to make.

> As I've posted in several replies today, the issue isn't with IMAP, it's
> with the sorting and storing of thousands of emails on a phone (however
> it was they arrived there).
>

Doesn't your email client have a search function?

> In other news, travelling home from Lincoln to Peterborough the other
> evening, and it being dark outside, I tried to use my phone to pass the
> time. For more than half the trip there was no usable mobile signal. So
> much for 20yrs of progress.

Didn't the train have WiFi? gWr's works in several tunnels now.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2021-12-06 09:30:28 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <sog19n$tro$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:25:43 on Sat, 4 Dec
>> 2021, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>> I just have a folder for e-mails with tickets that haven't been used yet.
>>> Copy e-mails in there when they arrive. Easily found there on phone,
>>> tablet or computer, even if several days old. Delete when used.
>>
>> How well does that work when you are stood in the station car park,
>> having bought a ticket a couple of minutes ago because the ticket
>> machine was broken (or had an impossibly long queue)?
>
> I have never encountered an email client that does not, by default,
> sort by time/date with newest on top. If I have just this minute
> bought the tickets, then the email with them will be right at the top
> of the list on my email client. I can see the concern for having
> bought tickets some time in the past so that they are burried under
> days of more recent emails, necessitating some means of finding them,
> but that doesn't affect just-bought-just-delivered emails.
>

I find emails by using the search function; from line, or subject, usually.
Typing the first few characters usually pops up the appropriate search
term.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/12/2021 19:53, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 06/12/2021 18:43, Bevan Price wrote:
>>> On 06/12/2021 17:22, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> On 06/12/2021 14:29, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ticket machines at stations can be almost as fiddly. The last one I
>>>>> used (pre-Covid) eventually let me find the ticket I wanted (a
>>>>> simple day return, not operator-specific), and then wasted time
>>>>> asking if I wanted someone's stupid "points" before it would issue a
>>>>> ticket.
>>>>
>>>> Where was that, I've never been offred any sort of points at a
>>>> physical ticket machine. Can think of a few websites that offer
>>>> nectar points, IIRC gWr is one.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Runcorn (before Covid) -- and it was offering nectar points (I
>>> couldn't remember the name, as I have never used them).
>>>
>>> I was buying a day return to Crewe, where I intended to buy a West
>>> Midlands Day Ranger ticket (The machines did not sell such things, and
>>> the Runcorn ticket office was a little late in opening.)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Interesting, never come across ticket machine that offered them, usually
>> you have to register your nectar account with the company and they
>> credit them on each purchase but for that you'd have to log in to the
>> ticket machine.
>>
>> NB, The reason I know about them is that SWMBO gets them from Sainsburys.
>>
>
> I wonder if there was some "dodgy" information sharing between companies
> that allowed the machine to recognise the credit card I was using to buy
> the tickets ? I vaguely remember that one of my statements used to
> mention nectar points, but I could never be bothered to investigate further.
>
> (There often seems to be a snag to such schemes, as I found with a
> supermarket card; collect enough points and you qualified for a discount
> -- but only if I spent far more than I needed.)
>

I haven't used a supermarket loyalty card for several years, but nectar was
quite useful, because you could spend them like cash in Sainsbury's (ok,
"spend them like a debit card"), if you'd collected points in that branch
in the previous few months.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

>
> You seem to be describing Tesco who issue two types of voucher :-
> 1.Money off, in proportion to the accumulated points.
> 2.Money off, not obviously related to points and valid for limited
> periods for purchases over a certain amount.
> The second type seems to have arrived more often in recent times.
>

Tesco's latest scam, which I'm now wise to after being stung twice [1], is
to have what looks like a meal deal or 3-for-£1.50 (etc) but which is
actually for clubcard holders only.

[1] I already only shop there when there's nowhere else convenient, so a
one-person boycott would inconvenience only myself

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:24:03 +0000, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:40:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <spaivj$1j6$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:00 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>You can perfectly well view PDFs with no Adobe software installed.
>>
>>That's true, although the rail ticketing sites direct you very strongly
>>towards using Adobe. Maybe that's something else they ought to review?
>
>I think the point is that Acrobat is both cross-platform and a dedicated
>PDF viewer, whereas other apps may only work for one or the other
>platform and other cross-platform apps, while they may do PDF as a
>secondary function, are not aimed specifically at that use case. So
>suggesting that customers install Acrobat is probably the simplest way
>of helping those who do not already have a PDF viewer installed, because
>the TOCs know it will work for everybody.
>

Adobe owns the PDF format, so there may be some requirement to mention it when recommending PDF viewers.

In any case, with large, complex PDFs (not rail tickets), not all viewers produce the same rendering, and it would
normally be the case that the Adobe rendering is most likely to be correct (if only because it's the one rendering
that's very likely to have been tested by the author of the PDF).

But I wouldn't have expected an experienced PC user (where the same considerations apply) like Roland to have been
tripped up so badly on this trivial issue that doesn't seem to phase even novice mobile phone users. It's as if Roland
has only just acquired his very first Android phone and is baffled by all the standard stuff that others take for
granted.

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 21:15:49 +0000, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:24:03 +0000, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:40:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In message <spaivj$1j6$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:00 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>>2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>You can perfectly well view PDFs with no Adobe software installed.
>>>
>>>That's true, although the rail ticketing sites direct you very strongly
>>>towards using Adobe. Maybe that's something else they ought to review?
>>
>>I think the point is that Acrobat is both cross-platform and a dedicated
>>PDF viewer, whereas other apps may only work for one or the other
>>platform and other cross-platform apps, while they may do PDF as a
>>secondary function, are not aimed specifically at that use case. So
>>suggesting that customers install Acrobat is probably the simplest way
>>of helping those who do not already have a PDF viewer installed, because
>>the TOCs know it will work for everybody.
>>
>
>Adobe owns the PDF format, so there may be some requirement to mention it
>when recommending PDF viewers.

Not any more, they don't. They did develop it, but it's been an Open ISO
Standard since 2008.

>In any case, with large, complex PDFs (not rail tickets), not all viewers produce the same rendering, and it would
>normally be the case that the Adobe rendering is most likely to be correct (if only because it's the one rendering
>that's very likely to have been tested by the author of the PDF).

The whole point of PDF is that it will look identical on any device when
rendered by any software. There are some advanced features, such as
editable forms and a document tree, which not all read-only viewers
support. But any given page of a PDF document will render identically in
any standards-compliant software.

In any case, the key part of an e-ticket is the QR code, which is simply
an embedded image.

Mark

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spaivj$1j6$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:06:59 on Tue, 14 Dec
> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp227c$g5s$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:31:56 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <soveff$uuq$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:39 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <soknoi$atl$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:13:38 on Mon, 6 Dec 2021,
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <soer6a$iu7$4@dont-email.me>, at 04:35:22 on Sat, 4
>>>>>>>>> Dec 2021,
>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <so3i39$h47$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:52:41 on Mon, 29 Nov
>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How did we manage in years gone by, before such things as
>>>>>>>>>>>> penalty fares were invented?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In London and SE by being happy to let people pay at their
>>>>>>>>>>> destination.
>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever TfL was called that week even had "excess fares" windows
>>>>>>>>>>> expressly for that purpose.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They still exist in many places, including Paddington,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Even on the Bakerloo Line?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Reading and Bristol Temple Meads.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suppose Reading is partly TfL these days.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ps I've actually given up wondering when the Elizabeth Line will open.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obviously, the Reading part is already open. The central London
>>>>>>>> section is currently expected to open next spring, but through
>>>>>>>> services from the west will be later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it's physically complete, with the software almost
>>>>>>>> ready, and now it's a case of rehearsing lots of operational
>>>>>>>> scenarios (ie, dealing with various different problems, faults,
>>>>>>>> evacuations, etc) and bedding down the trial operations. Some of
>>>>>>>> the NR stations are still incomplete, but that won't delay the opening.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Latest update: https://youtu.be/WXZ2BEthYEc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I made a special effort to be on the first [public] Thameslink train
>>>>>>> through the core. They were handing out commemorate cup-cakes, although
>>>>>>> something less perishable might have been welcome.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there's an equivalent train through the Crossrail Core, I'll probably
>>>>>>> try to be there. But it's far less clear if that milestone should be
>>>>>>> Paddington-Abbey_Wood, or a service that's through from further west.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The latter will be months later than the former, so will probably attract
>>>>>> much less razzamataz.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But be warned that the first public train might be very early in the
>>>>>> morning, as with the Battersea extension. There may be a VIP-only official
>>>>>> opening train the previous day, possibly with HM in the cab. Perhaps that
>>>>>> train will do what the initial public trains don't, and run through from
>>>>>> west to east.
>>>>>
>>>>> The first *public* train is what counts (if it's early in the morning so
>>>>> be it, but that wasn't what happened at Thameslink and it was
>>>>> mid-morning).
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that was unusual. Remember, I was on the same train, which I wouldn't
>>>> have been at 5am.
>>>
>>> Where did you get on - I boarded at Cambridge. Would have to look up the
>>> tickets, but probably around 10am.
>>
>> I travelled in the other direction, East Croydon to Finsbury Park.
>>
>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157693123465884>
>
> Wasn't that the second one through the core, or is my memory playing
> tricks?

The first northbound, but perhaps the first southbound was a bit earlier,
I'm not sure?

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spaj3r$2m6$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:09:15 on Tue, 14 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 15:16:10 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <puahrghpk13hqjvcqr1k6j9mqmat6rq3s5@4ax.com>, at 14:42:38 on
>>>> Tue, 14 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> I don't mean that. I mean that using a phone over which you have no
>>>>> control puts you in a very small minority. Almost all travellers who use
>>>>> any form of electronic ticketing will do so on a phone that they own, or
>>>>> at least have admin rights over.
>>>>
>>>> OK, so an alternative set of goalposts, I'll play.
>>>>
>>>> Your contention is that business users with work phones will normally
>>>> have admin rights over them - pardon me while I tiptoe over all these IT
>>>> department dead bodies.
>>>
>>> How many people travel on trains using electronic tickets delivered to a
>>> company mobile phone? And, of those people, how many of them are using a
>>> phone supplied by a company with an IT department which forces them to
>>> use a particular combination of non-standard email app and PDF reader
>>> app which makes it difficult or impossible to get tickets delivered to
>>> that phone by email?
>>>
>>> The last time I had a company phone, it was a bog-standard iPhone
>>> maintained by the IT department. Everything was Apple default apps. But,
>>> y'know, that's fine. I'm not an Apple fanboi; I prefer Android on a
>>> phone. But there was nothing that I needed to do on that phone that I
>>> couldn't do. Apple Mail worked fine with the company email system. Apple
>>> Mail opens PDFs natively, it doesn't even need to open an external app
>>> to view them. So it would have been fine for electronic ticketing, if
>>> I'd ever used it for that.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, any company phone these days that is controlled by a
>> proper IT department is an iPhone. I guess that’s down to the fractured
>> nature of Android.
>
> Apart from one I have experience with, who are Samsung. Which is also
> due to not having a bottomless pit of money.

You seem to be terrified about the cost of Apple kit. But companies take
into account the longer service life, so the cost per annum is closer. I
think iPhones are also more controllable and secure. And as you have so
successfully demonstrated in this thread, iPhones are simpler for
non-technical users.

Any US company thst has a corporate standard will likely choose Apple, but
maybe not very SMEs in Ely.

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <soer6b$iu7$5@dont-email.me>, at 04:35:24 on Sat, 4 Dec 2021,
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sodc51$dto$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:12:33 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <sod3bh$faq$3@dont-email.me>, at 12:42:25 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 03/12/2021 12:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <socvtm$nti$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:43:50 on Fri, 3 Dec 2021,
>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 03/12/2021 11:14, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <socqrg$o9u$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:20 on Fri, 3 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <soaejt$u8h$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:36:14 on Thu, 2
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2021,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People might get caught out less these days, because when the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine is broken I often saw them taking a photo with their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> phone (no, m-tickets
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For which journeys, for example?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (I've just done a test almost-purchase of an Ely-Cambridge return
>>>>>>>>>>>>> e-ticket, for example).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried Ely-Brandon just now, and the options are
>>>>>>>>>>>> Collection, Smartcard or Emailed pdf. As discussed before, I
>>>>>>>>>>>> have issues regarding an emailed pdf as fully an m-ticket
>>>>>>>>>>>> (although it does qualify as an e-ticket I suppose).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ely to Liverpool St, only offers Collection (not even ITSO
>>>>>>>>>>>> collection).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ely to Kings Cross or Kings Lynn, nothing if not inconsistent
>>>>>>>>>>>> (although the KGX ticket would also be valid to LST!)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Collection and PDF [so much for GTR's franchise commitment to
>>>>>>>>>>>> roll ITSO out across their whole network by about four years ago].
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What’s your objection to an emailed pdf?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This was discussed at great length a few months ago.
>>>>>>>>>> Mainly the need for the email to be sent to a phone, which requires
>>>>>>>>>> an account with the ticket vendor which has such an email address
>>>>>>>>>> associated with it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And that is a problem how?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because the accounts I have with ticket booking sites are currently
>>>>>>>> associated with email addresses which are delivered to my desktop, not
>>>>>>>> my phone.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why? You seem to delight in making life unnecessarily complicated for
>>>>>>> yourself and then blaming others for the inconvenience it causes you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What would be unnecessarily complicated would be for me to have routine
>>>>>> e-tickets delivered to my phone, because then I'd need to forward them
>>>>>> either to my desktop (which is my preferred audit trail for this kind of
>>>>>> thing, and also the appliance with a printer, which my phone isn't) or
>>>>>> to the person who I bought the ticket for (which is at least half of my
>>>>>> purchases).
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't your phone access the same email accounts as your desktop?
>>>>
>>>> Because the majority of my email is held on POP3 accounts that the
>>>> client can't access, nor would I want it to. It would be overwhelmed.
>>>
>>> Can't you have an email client on your phone to access the one one specific
>>> POP3 account which you tickets get delivered to?
>>
>> That would mean having a special account for tickets, and apart from
>> having to go round all my Apps and browsers changing the login
>> credentials, why should I have to, when other much less clunky ways of
>> delivering tickets ought to be possible.
>>
>> Talking of clunky, I parked my car at a station recently, and the
>> payment scheme wasn't any of the several apps I've had to set up (almost
>> all of them subsequently only to be used once) and the ticket machine
>> was very cumbersome. They clearly expect people to learn about it from
>> experience, rather than actually having a decent user interface. Good
>> news is, the screen was readable, the one at a hospital I visited a
>> couple of years ago the backlight appeared to be broken, and in the
>> absence of any street lighting, it was impossible to use without a
>> torch.
>>
>
> Doesn't everyone carry a torch in their pocket these days?
>

Roland probably doesn't know his phone includes a torch, or how to switch
it on.

Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 21:15:49 +0000, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:24:03 +0000, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:40:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <spaivj$1j6$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:00 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> You can perfectly well view PDFs with no Adobe software installed.
>>>>
>>>> That's true, although the rail ticketing sites direct you very strongly
>>>> towards using Adobe. Maybe that's something else they ought to review?
>>>
>>> I think the point is that Acrobat is both cross-platform and a dedicated
>>> PDF viewer, whereas other apps may only work for one or the other
>>> platform and other cross-platform apps, while they may do PDF as a
>>> secondary function, are not aimed specifically at that use case. So
>>> suggesting that customers install Acrobat is probably the simplest way
>>> of helping those who do not already have a PDF viewer installed, because
>>> the TOCs know it will work for everybody.
>>>
>>
>> Adobe owns the PDF format, so there may be some requirement to mention it
>> when recommending PDF viewers.
>
> Not any more, they don't. They did develop it, but it's been an Open ISO
> Standard since 2008.
>
>> In any case, with large, complex PDFs (not rail tickets), not all
>> viewers produce the same rendering, and it would
>> normally be the case that the Adobe rendering is most likely to be
>> correct (if only because it's the one rendering
>> that's very likely to have been tested by the author of the PDF).
>
> The whole point of PDF is that it will look identical on any device when
> rendered by any software. There are some advanced features, such as
> editable forms and a document tree, which not all read-only viewers
> support. But any given page of a PDF document will render identically in
> any standards-compliant software.

I'm pretty sure they don't all render identically, presumably because they
don't all follow the standards perfectly.

>
> In any case, the key part of an e-ticket is the QR code, which is simply
> an embedded image.
>

True

On 14/12/2021 20:42, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> You seem to be describing Tesco who issue two types of voucher :-
>> 1.Money off, in proportion to the accumulated points.
>> 2.Money off, not obviously related to points and valid for limited
>> periods for purchases over a certain amount.
>> The second type seems to have arrived more often in recent times.
>>
>
> Tesco's latest scam, which I'm now wise to after being stung twice [1], is
> to have what looks like a meal deal or 3-for-£1.50 (etc) but which is
> actually for clubcard holders only.
>
> [1] I already only shop there when there's nowhere else convenient, so a
> one-person boycott would inconvenience only myself

The only use I have for Tesco is the very occasional distress purchase
or the use of their rest room which conveniently is between home and the
railway station. I prefer to walk three times the distance to Morrisons
or four times to Aldi.

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 14/12/2021 20:42, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You seem to be describing Tesco who issue two types of voucher :-
>>> 1.Money off, in proportion to the accumulated points.
>>> 2.Money off, not obviously related to points and valid for limited
>>> periods for purchases over a certain amount.
>>> The second type seems to have arrived more often in recent times.
>>>
>>
>> Tesco's latest scam, which I'm now wise to after being stung twice [1], is
>> to have what looks like a meal deal or 3-for-£1.50 (etc) but which is
>> actually for clubcard holders only.
>>
>> [1] I already only shop there when there's nowhere else convenient, so a
>> one-person boycott would inconvenience only myself
>
> The only use I have for Tesco is the very occasional distress purchase
> or the use of their rest room which conveniently is between home and the
> railway station. I prefer to walk three times the distance to Morrisons
> or four times to Aldi.
>

Just curious, why?

Personally, I prefer Waitrose, Sainsbury's and M&S to Tesco, and have never
set foot in a Morrisons, Aldi or Lidl. I'm not impressed with the Morrisson
shop on Amazon.

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:08:35 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <spagf7$dpb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:24:08 on Tue, 14 Dec
>2021, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>On 14/12/2021 14:36, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <7j6brg14mtdkrntob51ds416s8njen8cc3@4ax.com>, at 07:09:36
>>>on Sun, 12 Dec 2021, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>>remarked:
>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:23:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <1ia5rg5tvo3okv08iei4krmdlomr02rnq6@4ax.com>, at 01:24:47 on
>>>>> Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:32:59 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <mk4lqgdglqpc327o7ukkp49ollpkk0mmln@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>22:54:32 on
>>>>>>> Fri, 3 Dec 2021, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>>>>>>remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In theory if you aren't an invalid, you aren't supposed to use the
>>>>>>>>> concessions given to invalid carriages (of which mobility
>>>>>>>>>scooters are
>>>>>>>>> nowadays one of the most visible incarnations).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can be an invalid without being a disabled person.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you be an invalid entitled to take advantage of the concessions
>>>>>>> available to mobility scooter drivers, but not qualifying as whatever
>>>>>>> those rules define as "an invalid"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to ask all of the multifarious service providers (e.g. TfL
>>>>>> will let you on the bus free without providing proof that you are
>>>>>> blind or unable to walk but others might not).
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that allowing you on the bus with a mobility scooter,
>>>>>
>>>> "10.1.2 Free travel. If you are a wheelchair or mobility scooter user,
>>>> you can travel free on any of
>>>> our bus services at all times."
>>>> [https://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-conditions-of-carriage.pdf]
>>>>
>>>>> or are you trying to move the goalposts?
>>>>>
>>>> I leave that to you.
>
>>> You are doing a pretty good job yourself.
>>> I'm going to try to wrap this up by suggesting they mean "legitimate
>>>user of a mobility scooter", and ask what you think that qualification
>>>is.
>
>>> Meanwhile, are you suggesting that a completely fit and healthy
>>>person can get a free ride on a bus, as long as they find someone to
>>>push them in a wheelchair?
>>>
>>>>>> Bear in mind also (using someone known to me as an example) that
>>>>>> mobility aids can be a preventative measure against a person with
>>>>>> degenerative conditions reaching the state of being registered
>>>>>>disabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably so, but how does that intersect with the concessions given to
>>>>> riders of mobility scooters?
>>>>>
>>>> I refer you back to your question above and the responses to it (i.e.
>>>> you seem to have moved to a different goal). The word "invalid"
>>>> (except in the sense of "not valid") does not appear in TfL's CoC. I
>>>> have a colleague with multiple conditions who from time to time needs
>>>> to use a wheelchair/scooter who fails to meet the requirements for
>>>> higher rate disability benefits (one of the measures used by LAs for
>>>> automatic granting of travel comcessions) but IMU meets the definition
>>>> of a "disabled person" per s.146(d) Transport Act 2000 as that
>>>> specifies no distance over which a person "has a substantial and
>>>> long-term adverse effect on his ability to walk," or the nature of the
>>>> place where that activity is exercised (e.g. Flat ground v. stairs).
>
>>> We are getting there slowly. Are TfL more lenient than s146, and to
>>>what extent?
>>>
>>>> Roughly speaking, if you are disabled (not blind)
>>> What about the deaf, or persons with 'Learning difficulties' etc.
>>>
>>>> and walk in the front door of a TfL bus you have to show a Freedom
>>>>Pass/ENCTS card; if you enter the rear door on wheels then you don't
>>>>need to show anything. TfL's CoC seem to be crafted to put relevant
>>>>people on trust and avoid crew/passenger time being wasted by arguing
>>>>about matters that could need evidence from a medical practitioner to decide.
>
>>> There already exists a certification scheme - the Blue Badge (albeit
>>>for other scenarios).
>>
>>Blue Badge is limited - it does not cover, for example as used above,
>>deaf people or those with learning difficulties. What "certification
>>scheme" covers these disabled people (as per Equality Act 2010 sect
>>6(1))?
>
>My impression is that mobility scooters are intended for people with
>mobility issues (well, mainly anyway). The blue badge is also highly
>skewed towards those with mobility issues (but perhaps some other groups
>too).
>
>If I was drafting a rule to tighten up the acceptance of mobility
>scooters for free on buses, I think I'd go for people with mobility
>issues as recognised by the issue of a blue badge, rather than some
>other definition that included the deaf [no particular reason to single
>out that group, but people are probably more familiar with its
>presentation than several other recognised disabilities].
>
I see the gov.uk page "Who can get a Blue Badge?"
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/blue-badge-can-i-get-one/can-i-get-a-blue-badge
has been updated in August.
(standard caveat - gov.uk does have a knack of bowdlerising
legislation to the extent of being wrong)

As I read it, you now have more chance of getting a Blue Badge than of
getting sufficient PIP points to qualify automatically for travel
concessions :-

"You may be eligible for a badge if one or more of the following
applies:-
[including]
+you find walking very difficult due to pain, breathlessness or the
time it takes
[i.e. no distance specified as in PIP assessment]
[.........]
+you have a severe disability in both arms and drive regularly, but
cannot operate pay-and-display parking machines
[.........]
+you struggle severely to plan or follow a journey
+you find it difficult or impossible to control your actions and lack
awareness of the impact you could have on others
+you regularly have intense and overwhelming responses to situations
causing temporary loss of behavioural control
+you frequently become extremely anxious or fearful of public/open
spaces"

The last four in combination seem to be rather less stringent than the
tests applied in PIP assessments which more or less require you to be
severely mentally handicapped to get travel concessions via the s.146
route:-
"(f) has a learning disability, that is, a state of arrested or
incomplete development of mind which includes significant impairment
of intelligence and social functioning,"

I deal with someone who has a Blue Badge but cannot get PIP because of
the anxiety caused in the process. Congestion Charge exemption from
TfL depends on the Blue Badge but the BB gives no clue to why it has
been issued so that spoils transport authorities subdividing the
general pool of Blue Badge holders for its own purposes.

In message <spaqa0$mfs$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:12:00 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spa1a0$stp$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:05:20 on Tue, 14 Dec
>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> The original query was why can’t you accept a pdf ticket emailed to you.
>>> *if* that flow doesn’t have an e-ticket the matter stops there, as
>>>there’s
>>> nothing to email.
>>
>> Which brings us back to *my* original query, which is about the railways
>> having compulsory ticket zones, upping the penalty to a whopping £100,
>> and yet making no effort to make it less likely that you'll be failed by
>> their ticketing systems.
>
>Despite the lack of any kind of hard evidence that the railways would
>impose whopping penalties on anyone faced with the genuine inability to buy
>a ticket.

I'm not the person you have to convince. Which in the first instance is
the general public faced with the dilemma of no TVM and hectoring
signage.

>>> *assuming* there is an e-ticket to be emailed you then argued you
>>> couldn’t manage an emailed ticket
>>
>> I've consistently argued how non-user-friendly it is to email pdfs to a
>> hone.
>
>And hardly anyone here has accepted your arguments.

That's mainly because people here are about as far removed from a
representative sample of the travelling public as it's possible to get.
What disappoints me, though, is the inability to put themselves in other
people's shoes.

--
Roland Perry

In message <spar4d$qiu$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:26:05 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Certes <none@nowhere.net> remarked:
>On 14/12/2021 19:12, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <spa1a0$stp$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:05:20 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> The original query was why can’t you accept a pdf ticket emailed to you.
>>>> *if* that flow doesn’t have an e-ticket the matter stops there,
>>>>as there’s
>>>> nothing to email.
>>>
>>> Which brings us back to *my* original query, which is about the railways
>>> having compulsory ticket zones, upping the penalty to a whopping £100,
>>> and yet making no effort to make it less likely that you'll be failed by
>>> their ticketing systems.
>> Despite the lack of any kind of hard evidence that the railways
>>would
>> impose whopping penalties on anyone faced with the genuine inability to buy
>> a ticket.
>
>They don't need to. They just need to make people believe the railway
>is a customer-hostile organisation, where you get fined £100 for not
>holding something unobtainable, and they'll get back in their cars.

Thankyou, I see at least one person here shares my concern.
--
Roland Perry