In message <sp9pov$1nf5$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:56:47 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 19:35:13 +0000
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <sp7tef$18se$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 16:47:11 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:06:05 +0000
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>In message <sp7pqc$19tb$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:45:16 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>WhatsApp is free, which is good for international calls, and also does
>>>>>>video calls, and group (conference) calls. The people you are messaging
>>>>>
>>>>>So do a boatload of apps without having to sign up to facebooks T&Cs.
>>>>
>>>>The only one which comes close is Skype, and that's been part of the
>>>>Microsoft empire for years.
>>>
>>>Zoom, Jabber, Slack, MS Teams.
>>
>>Jabber, Grand-dad?
>
>Used extensively by a number of corporates including Airbus.
>
>>Never met anyone who uses Slack.
>
>See above. I've worked at 1 UK SME and 1 international in the last 5 years who
>used it. Seems you're rather out of touch with the modern corporate world.

Most of them seem to use Teams. And the corporates I worked with 15yrs
ago used Jabber, but didn't persist with it.

>>>Define seamless.
>>
>>Take a photo, and broadcast it, all in a couple of clicks on the same
>>phone.
>
>Picture messaging could do that 20 years ago.

Not as easily as WhatsApp.

>>>In which case you're retired full stop since someone with a sense of self
>>>importance such as yourself would have updated your linkedin long ago.
>>
>>I've not used Linked-In for at least five years. It's a zombie site,
>>which has never lived up to its promise. Later... the photo is almost
>
>Its an online CV. Not sure what "promise" you expect it to live up to unless
>you're just irritated because it didn't lead to any head hunting of you.

I never expected it to lead to any head hunting, nor would I use it to
recruit anyone. It was simply a way to keep in contact with colleagues
across mine and other industries.

But by and large, they didn't log in often enough to make it a useful
communications medium. Skype was more immediate, and lots of people also
moved over to Facebook for the store and forward stuff (yes, it's not
exclusively pictures of cats and what you had for lunch).
--
Roland Perry

On 14/12/2021 11:19, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <sp9tvg$qv$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:08:32 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
> martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>> On 14/12/2021 08:37, Tweed wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sp1ut8$f9q$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:20 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 11/12/2021 07:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <7ed7rghlh7i73th432mvlq6h2f1c9nrcaq@4ax.com>, at 20:22:08
>>>>>> on  Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:07:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>> 19:09:15 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 15:38:03 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple email
>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts
>>>>>>>>>>>> from different sources, several of which are high volume),
>>>>>>>>>>>> so my
>>>>>>>>>>>> experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on
>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I  need
>>>>>>>>>> to  read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most of
>>>>>>>>>> them  can  wait  until I get back. But I don't have any real
>>>>>>>>>> difficulty reading  them  when  I do need to.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>>>>>> compromise  when the train company is insisting on using 1992
>>>>>>>>>>>  deliver  train tickets, when there are numerous far better
>>>>>>>>>>> more modern  ways  to do  it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan
>>>>>>>>>> of having
>>>>>>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs
>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar
>>>>>>>> social media
>>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WhatsApp is, like email, SMS and Usenet, a delivery mechanism, not a
>>>>>>> file format. Just like email, WhatsApp can be used to deliver a PDF
>>>>>>> containing a QR code that forms an e-ticket.
>>>>
>>>>>> Pedantically, that would be an m-ticket (a ticket that's a bearer
>>>>>> bond  stored on your mobile phone); e-tickets are entries on a
>>>>>> central
>>>>>> database where you present some sort of independently verifiable
>>>>>> credential that they relate to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Outside the terminal nerds who gives a monkeys?
>>>>
>>>> It matters because of the alternative requirements for always-on
>>>> connectivity vs validating [composting?] a ticket before travel.
>>>>
>>>> Modern online train ticketing is rife with warnings that order
>>>> confirmations aren't tickets, and when there's a two-stage process
>>>> involved it can't do any harm for passengers to understand a little
>>>> about the underlying processes.
>>>>
>>>> Where it might really matter is the situation where they've bought
>>>> ticket for someone else. And anti-cloning measures introduced by the
>>>> transport operator might make that next to impossible.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, extended family have been passing around some online theatre
>>>> tickets as people juggle their Covid status, and while some have
>>>> informal processes, others are more tricky. It's hardly ever as simple
>>>> as just handing over a bit of paper.
>
>>>  The rail industry is removing (removed?) m-tickets, so stop worrying.
>>>
>> TfW introduced their new apps with m-tickets nine days ago and their
>> integrated new website which will push tickets to your app within the
>> time it takes to pick up your phone.  So not all the ToCs are removing
>> m-tickets.
>
> Genuine question: are those tickets transferable to a different phone?
>
> I'd try that out, as well as the auto-push to the wallet, if I didn't
> have to set up a fresh account. Well, not this week, anyway.

I don't have any active tickets at the moment to check but I believe you
can use them on different devices up until the point you activate them.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sp9m9u$d0m$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:34 on Tue, 14 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp9hte$u55$1@dont-email.me>, at 07:42:38 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sp899l$j07$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:09:25 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sp7t6k$vot$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:43:00 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sp7s8a$dhf$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:26:50 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <sp7ob7$ukf$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:07 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <5le3YYTK0=s9NL3Z5LJXMYJlxRqd@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14:28:12 on Mon,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13 Dec 2021, Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:35:15 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But still requires launching and logging-in to Adobe. Which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of course
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> once again requires connectivity (to facilitate the log-in).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it doesn't. You bypass the login screen by clicking the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cross in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the top right hand corner.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not at all obvious that this would circumvent the need
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to log in,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather than closing the app.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Even knowing you, I'm astonished at the heavy weather you're
>>>>>>>>>>>> making of this
>>>>>>>>>>>> trivial, self-inflicted problem!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But I didn't inflict the brain-dead last century ticket delivery
>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism upon myself. That was Greater Anglia.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's how many tickets of all sorts get routinely delivered (eg, to
>>>>>>>>>> exhibitions, cinemas, shows, etc). I've never heard of any
>>>>>>>>>> ordinary person,
>>>>>>>>>> even non-techie oldies, having a problem — just you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But most of those are not required in real time when you've arrived at
>>>>>>>>> the station to find the TVM broken.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, I have ordered such tickets, weeks in advance, on my PC, not my
>>>>>>>>> phone.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why don’t you order the tickets in advance, eg when leaving
>>>>>>>> Then it’s irrelevant what the working status of the TVM is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because I don't want to spend that much time ordering tickets costing
>>>>>>> typically less than £3 each, in advance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just like I'd rather pay a bus fare in ten seconds when boarding, rather
>>>>>>> than have to order it in advance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or do you randomly pass the station and suddenly decide you want to
>>>>>>>> make a trip?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quite often my choice, depending on where we are on the clockface, is to
>>>>>>> catch a bus or a train.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And too many times I've got to the station and found the train has been
>>>>>>> cancelled, so rather than wait an hour for the next one, decide to
>>>>>>> abandon the trip until another day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After exploring the ITSO feature of the EMR app I had a closer
>>>>>> look at the e-ticket bit. It offers to deliver the e-ticket to the
>>>>>> in app wallet, or by email, where I can then save it to Apple
>>>>>> Wallet. So your objection to email vanishes as the app can save the ticket.
>>>>>
>>>>> The EMT ITSO app (which I not only have, but used) is interoperable with
>>>>> Greater Anglia ITSO validators. I've mentioned this in the past - and
>>>>> noted it's probably due to both TOCs being associated with Abellio.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's a rare glimmer of hope.
>>>>>
>>>>>> So at this point I can’t see how it is any harder to use than the TVM,
>>>>>> and you could do it from the car in the station car park.
>>>>>
>>>>> Buying a ticket from the TVM is about four presses. Because my
>>>>> destination will be one of the short-list of favourites, and all that's
>>>>> required then is picking the ticket type, plus two more presses for
>>>>> myself if using a railcard. Then contactless payment. By comparison the
>>>>> apps are much more fiddly.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also displays live departures, so you can’t moan
>>>>>> about not knowing the train running status from the comfort of your car.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact, I've mainly talked about being "stood in the car park in the
>>>>> rain", because that's where the ticket machine is often located. More
>>>>> often than not, however, I will have walked to the station, but I
>>>>> realise this is fairly unusual so didn't want to distract from the
>>>>> general theory.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I await the reasons why this is now totally impractical……..
>>>>>
>>>>> As well as the above, it also requires the flow in question to have ITSO
>>>>> ticketing as one of the options. And as I've said about a hundred times
>>>>> over the past couple of years, while ITSO ticketing across their whole
>>>>> network was a GTR franchise commitment which they should have delivered
>>>>> long ago, they haven't.
>>>>
>>>> No it doesn’t. The app can deliver the ticket to the app’s
>>>> wallet. This was one of your earlier requirements lest you forget.
>>>
>>> *Only if* the particular journey you are embarking upon has that option.
>>>
>>> NOT ALL OF THEM DO
>>>
>>> This [understanding the lack of universality] is not rocket science.
>>>
>>>> Now, let’s get this straight, you don’t want to use an app in
>>>> case you are stood out in the rain on the canopy free platform, yet
>>>> are walking to the station.
>>>
>>> If you want to go down that rathole (because you've lost the main
>>> argument about universality of ticketing) ... holding an umbrella which
>>> makes it difficult to also be prodding a phone. Especially in the dark.
>>>
>>>> So I think we can now discount the weather as a spurious argument.
>>>> So even if you prefer to use the TVM there’s absolutely no reason
>>>> why you can’t use the app if the TVM doesn’t work.
>>>
>>> Because the ticket I want isn't necessarily offered with that delivery
>>> mode.
>>>
>>> NOT ALL OF THEM DO
>>
>> I don’t think I ever claimed every flow did. My original query to you was
>> to ask what was wrong with pdf tickets delivered by email.
>
> The inherent clunkiness, which doesn't need repeating, yet again. When
> there are several much more 21st Century ways.
>
>> Clearly if a pdf ticket doesn’t exist it can’t be delivered by email.
>
> You are conflating two issues there. Whether there's an e|m-ticket
> available at all, and the delivery mechanism for those which do exist.
>
>> You gave a long series of goat herder reasons why you couldn’t
>> possibly cope with email delivery.
>
> I can cope with it, but not necessarily in the few minutes before
> boarding a train, having arrived at the station to find the TVM broken.
>
> And can I remind you of my recent e-ticket purchase for the first train
> from Soham, where I did ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING REQUIRED OF A
> NON-GOATHERDER, and yet Greater Anglia omitted to actually email the
> bloody thing. Despite having emailed me separately to tell me they
> had/would (saying in the same breath they had emailed it, but that I
> should expect it to be sent in the next 15 minutes - how confusing is
> that?)
>
> Meanwhile, although I had ordered it the day before, what if I'd ordered
> it on the day, for the 9 minute trip, and the trip was over before the
> 15 minutes had expired?
>
> NB Some delivery-waits are advertised as more than 15 minutes.
>
>> One of your requirements became that the app had to have its own wallet.
>> This is shown to be solved.
>
> Not if the ticket I want to buy DOES NOT OFFER THAT OPTION (even if the
> app claims to offer it for some undisclosed subset of tickets).
>
> Why do you persist in failing to acknowledge that possibility?
>
I haven’t failed to acknowledge that possibility. You are failing to follow
the logic of the argument.

On 13/12/2021 16:35, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t9s9rgts5sfakjo1d78082i3c5il3c1cve@4ax.com>, at 18:55:52 on
> Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>> On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 13:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> WhatsApp has an API, which can be used to send a message to any number
>>>> registered with WhatsApp even if it isn't already known to you. So it
>>>> can be integrated into an online retail environment in a way which
>>>> allows a customer to supply their phone number and the system to then
>>>> send a message via WhatsApp to that number. From a business
>>>> perspective,
>>>> this is a very useful means of communicating with customers as
>>>> sending a
>>>> WhatsApp message is free, unlike SMS. Plus, of course, you can send
>>>> attachments, which you can't easily do with SMS. Abd unlike email and
>>>> SMS, WhatsApp has a delivery feedback mechanism built in so you know if
>>>> your message has reached the recipient.
>>>>
>>>> The downside, at the moment, is that access to the API is strictly
>>>> controlled (which it has to be, in order to prevent spammers using it),
>>>> and there are several hoops to jump through in order to get a Business
>>>> WhatsApp Account and be eligible for the API. So there are not, yet,
>>>> many organisations using it. But, in the long run, I expect it to
>>>> become
>>>> one of the primary means whereby businesses communicate with customers.
>>>
>>> The real problem is tying your retail delivery system into a third party
>>> owned proprietary system, owned by an outfit with ever diminishing
>>> public
>>> and political trust.
>>
>> The point is that if you are selling a product which can be delivered
>> digitally, then it makes sense, from a customer service perspective, to
>> offer multiple means of delivery. Even assuming that the primary means
>> remains email (which is likely, at least for the foreseeable future), it
>> would be a useful add-on for ticket vendors to be able to have an extra,
>> optional field on the order page which says something like "Enter your
>> phone number here to get the ticket sent to you via WhatsApp". That
>> doesn't override, or replace, the email delivery mechanism, but it would
>> be useful for a large number of customers. If WhatsApp ever goes out of
>> fashion, or is supplanted by a different IM system, then alternatives
>> which offer a similar API facility could be implemented instead of, or
>> even alongside, WhatsApp.
>>
>> Offering WhatsApp as an optional delivery mechanism is no more tying you
>> in to anything than offering traditional postal delivery of a printed
>> ticket ties you in to Royal Mail, or offering TVM printing ties you in
>> the machinery. On the contrary, the more different delivery mechanisms
>> you can offer, the less you and your customers are reliant on any single
>> one of them.
>
> I'd be happy if a train company with a train ticket booking app, could
> be arsed to send the tickets to that App's existing ticket wallet.
> Apparently Greater Anglia can't.

That is a major problem. The railway companies are seemingly incapable
of agreeing on a simple, universal and reliable system that will
function everywhere throughout the network. Instead, a lot of TOCs seem
to want their own, often incompatible, Apps.
And can we expect DfT to produce something simple, universal and
comprehensible to non-tech users ? I doubt it.

I, for one, will remain a dinosaur and continue to use paper tickets, or
my Mersey ITSO pass for local journeys. (Not that I have done much rail
travel since February 2020.)

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sp9l43$ok5$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:37:23 on Tue, 14 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp1ut8$f9q$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:20 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 11/12/2021 07:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <7ed7rghlh7i73th432mvlq6h2f1c9nrcaq@4ax.com>, at 20:22:08
>>>>> on Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:07:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at 19:09:15 on
>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 15:38:03 on
>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple
>>>>>>>>>>> accounts from different sources, several of which are high
>>>>>>>>>>> volume), so my experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on your
>>>>>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I rarely
>>>>>>>>> need to read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most
>>>>>>>>> can wait until I get back. But I don't have any real
>>>>>>>>> difficulty reading them when I do need to.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>>>>> compromise when the train company is insisting on using 1992
>>>>>>>>>> deliver train tickets, when there are numerous far better
>>>>>>>>>> more modern ways to do it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan of having
>>>>>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs could
>>>>>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WhatsApp is, like email, SMS and Usenet, a delivery mechanism, not a
>>>>>> file format. Just like email, WhatsApp can be used to deliver a PDF
>>>>>> containing a QR code that forms an e-ticket.
>>>
>>>>> Pedantically, that would be an m-ticket (a ticket that's a bearer
>>>>> bond stored on your mobile phone); e-tickets are entries on a central
>>>>> database where you present some sort of independently verifiable
>>>>> credential that they relate to you.
>>>>
>>>> Outside the terminal nerds who gives a monkeys?
>>>
>>> It matters because of the alternative requirements for always-on
>>> connectivity vs validating [composting?] a ticket before travel.
>>>
>>> Modern online train ticketing is rife with warnings that order
>>> confirmations aren't tickets, and when there's a two-stage process
>>> involved it can't do any harm for passengers to understand a little
>>> about the underlying processes.
>>>
>>> Where it might really matter is the situation where they've bought
>>> ticket for someone else. And anti-cloning measures introduced by the
>>> transport operator might make that next to impossible.
>>>
>>> FWIW, extended family have been passing around some online theatre
>>> tickets as people juggle their Covid status, and while some have
>>> informal processes, others are more tricky. It's hardly ever as simple
>>> as just handing over a bit of paper.
>>
>> The rail industry is removing (removed?) m-tickets, so stop worrying.
>
> I would characterise an in-App ticket (as GA and EMR purport to support)
> as an m-ticket, unless it's an e-ticket in disguise, in which case it
> would require a facility to export to a different phone to properly
> qualify.

Well you are alone in that characterisation. At the very basic level, if
you can screenshot the in-app ticket (or even photograph it with another
phone) and the copy remains valid it is an e-ticket. ie the ticket is
simply a pointer to an entry in a remote database. An m-ticket is like a
real conventional railway ticket, it can’t be copied and is the only
(realistic) proof that you have a valid ticket.

Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/12/2021 16:35, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t9s9rgts5sfakjo1d78082i3c5il3c1cve@4ax.com>, at 18:55:52 on
>> Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 13:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> WhatsApp has an API, which can be used to send a message to any number
>>>>> registered with WhatsApp even if it isn't already known to you. So it
>>>>> can be integrated into an online retail environment in a way which
>>>>> allows a customer to supply their phone number and the system to then
>>>>> send a message via WhatsApp to that number. From a business
>>>>> perspective,
>>>>> this is a very useful means of communicating with customers as
>>>>> sending a
>>>>> WhatsApp message is free, unlike SMS. Plus, of course, you can send
>>>>> attachments, which you can't easily do with SMS. Abd unlike email and
>>>>> SMS, WhatsApp has a delivery feedback mechanism built in so you know if
>>>>> your message has reached the recipient.
>>>>>
>>>>> The downside, at the moment, is that access to the API is strictly
>>>>> controlled (which it has to be, in order to prevent spammers using it),
>>>>> and there are several hoops to jump through in order to get a Business
>>>>> WhatsApp Account and be eligible for the API. So there are not, yet,
>>>>> many organisations using it. But, in the long run, I expect it to
>>>>> become
>>>>> one of the primary means whereby businesses communicate with customers.
>>>>
>>>> The real problem is tying your retail delivery system into a third party
>>>> owned proprietary system, owned by an outfit with ever diminishing
>>>> public
>>>> and political trust.
>>>
>>> The point is that if you are selling a product which can be delivered
>>> digitally, then it makes sense, from a customer service perspective, to
>>> offer multiple means of delivery. Even assuming that the primary means
>>> remains email (which is likely, at least for the foreseeable future), it
>>> would be a useful add-on for ticket vendors to be able to have an extra,
>>> optional field on the order page which says something like "Enter your
>>> phone number here to get the ticket sent to you via WhatsApp". That
>>> doesn't override, or replace, the email delivery mechanism, but it would
>>> be useful for a large number of customers. If WhatsApp ever goes out of
>>> fashion, or is supplanted by a different IM system, then alternatives
>>> which offer a similar API facility could be implemented instead of, or
>>> even alongside, WhatsApp.
>>>
>>> Offering WhatsApp as an optional delivery mechanism is no more tying you
>>> in to anything than offering traditional postal delivery of a printed
>>> ticket ties you in to Royal Mail, or offering TVM printing ties you in
>>> the machinery. On the contrary, the more different delivery mechanisms
>>> you can offer, the less you and your customers are reliant on any single
>>> one of them.
>>
>> I'd be happy if a train company with a train ticket booking app, could
>> be arsed to send the tickets to that App's existing ticket wallet.
>> Apparently Greater Anglia can't.
>
> That is a major problem. The railway companies are seemingly incapable
> of agreeing on a simple, universal and reliable system that will
> function everywhere throughout the network. Instead, a lot of TOCs seem
> to want their own, often incompatible, Apps.
> And can we expect DfT to produce something simple, universal and
> comprehensible to non-tech users ? I doubt it.

Not the DfT, but GBR. But probably not any time soon.

>
> I, for one, will remain a dinosaur and continue to use paper tickets, or
> my Mersey ITSO pass for local journeys. (Not that I have done much rail
> travel since February 2020.)
>
>
>

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 14/12/2021 11:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <sp9tvg$qv$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:08:32 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
>> martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>> On 14/12/2021 08:37, Tweed wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sp1ut8$f9q$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:20 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 11/12/2021 07:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <7ed7rghlh7i73th432mvlq6h2f1c9nrcaq@4ax.com>, at 20:22:08
>>>>>>> on  Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:07:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 19:09:15 on
>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 15:38:03 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple email
>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>> from different sources, several of which are high volume),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> so my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on
>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I  need
>>>>>>>>>>> to  read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most of
>>>>>>>>>>> them  can  wait  until I get back. But I don't have any real
>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty reading  them  when  I do need to.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>>>>>>> compromise  when the train company is insisting on using 1992
>>>>>>>>>>>>  deliver  train tickets, when there are numerous far better
>>>>>>>>>>>> more modern  ways  to do  it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan
>>>>>>>>>>> of having
>>>>>>>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs
>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar
>>>>>>>>> social media
>>>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WhatsApp is, like email, SMS and Usenet, a delivery mechanism, not a
>>>>>>>> file format. Just like email, WhatsApp can be used to deliver a PDF
>>>>>>>> containing a QR code that forms an e-ticket.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pedantically, that would be an m-ticket (a ticket that's a bearer
>>>>>>> bond  stored on your mobile phone); e-tickets are entries on a
>>>>>>> central
>>>>>>> database where you present some sort of independently verifiable
>>>>>>> credential that they relate to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Outside the terminal nerds who gives a monkeys?
>>>>>
>>>>> It matters because of the alternative requirements for always-on
>>>>> connectivity vs validating [composting?] a ticket before travel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modern online train ticketing is rife with warnings that order
>>>>> confirmations aren't tickets, and when there's a two-stage process
>>>>> involved it can't do any harm for passengers to understand a little
>>>>> about the underlying processes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where it might really matter is the situation where they've bought
>>>>> ticket for someone else. And anti-cloning measures introduced by the
>>>>> transport operator might make that next to impossible.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, extended family have been passing around some online theatre
>>>>> tickets as people juggle their Covid status, and while some have
>>>>> informal processes, others are more tricky. It's hardly ever as simple
>>>>> as just handing over a bit of paper.
>>
>>>>  The rail industry is removing (removed?) m-tickets, so stop worrying.
>>>>
>>> TfW introduced their new apps with m-tickets nine days ago and their
>>> integrated new website which will push tickets to your app within the
>>> time it takes to pick up your phone.  So not all the ToCs are removing
>>> m-tickets.
>>
>> Genuine question: are those tickets transferable to a different phone?
>>
>> I'd try that out, as well as the auto-push to the wallet, if I didn't
>> have to set up a fresh account. Well, not this week, anyway.
>
> I don't have any active tickets at the moment to check but I believe you
> can use them on different devices up until the point you activate them.
>

From the TfW website

An mTicket is a ticket contained within a mobile phone app that displays as
a barcode.

It must be activated prior to use and is available to be purchased for most
journeys through the TfW website and App.

An eTicket is an electronic ticket that includes a barcode sent as a PDF in
an e-mail.

The eTicket can be saved to a mobile phone or printed out but is only valid
for single use and only available on some TfW Advance tickets.
======

From this it seems reasonable to infer that TfW doesn’t have the
infrastructure to cope with e-tickets, and this might simply due to poor
availability of real time communications in some parts of Wales, or just
poor capital investment. They can cope with Advances as e-tickets as they
are effectively self composting, as you can only use them on a specific
train.

In message <sp9v6b$e76$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:29:15 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <jl5frg91mcaoougmr7qqf5f7tps52pg4t1@4ax.com>, at 18:57:24 on
>> Mon, 13 Dec 2021, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:45:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <sov5ho$27d$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:10:16 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/12/2021 19:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <soo710$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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't stop you going back to the car to get out f the rain or even
>>>>>> sheltering under the station canopy while you order the ticket. No need
>>>>>> to stand in the rain.
>>>>>
>>>>> The real point is that once you can cope with buying electronic tickets,
>>>>> which seems to be Roland’s problem, you don’t need to worry about the
>>>>> existence of a TVM, rain or no rain.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is the patchy nature of e-ticketing.
>>>>
>>>>> So far his arguments have been that he doesn’t like the apps (excuses
>>>>> various), so folk have suggested he uses the emailed pdf, which then
>>>>> generates a long list of spurious reasons why that’s not
>>>>>workable either.
>>>>
>>>> The reasons aren't spurious, and only arise because the e-ticketing
>>>> platform is unable (by design) to deliver the tickets to my phone by a
>>>> less last-century method.
>>>>
>>>> Or as I've found out the last couple of days, unable to deliver them at
>>>> all. ["We've emailed you the PDF" - panto 'oh no you haven't']
>>>
>>> It sounds very much to me as if you've managed to log in to the app
>>> using a different email address to the one you used to buy the tickets
>>> (you did create an account rather than buy as a guest, I hope?).
>>
>> I haven't made that rookie mistake! And it's something I specifically
>> double-checked before buying my tickets a few days ago.
>>
>> And of course that wouldn't explain the lack-of-arrival of the PDF (when
>> I did get the order confirmation) for the first one.
>
>Was it spam trapped?

No, and the order confirmation, and second and third ones I've bought
this week (Ely-Soham, and Mountfitchett-BS) came through as expected.
--
Roland Perry

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.

>*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 moaned about a lack of wallet within the app.

A lack of tickets being loaded into those wallets (quite a few appear to
have the functionality, but it doesn't always work).

>I pointed out to you that at least one app, EMR, does have a wallet.

Yes, it does, and so does the GA app which is very similar.

>So now you go into classical goal post moving by questioning the lack
>of e-tickets for a flow.

Not at all, I have consistently noted that (and have now made not one,
but three, purchases) despite there being a wallet visible in the app,
for whatever reason (and we have to wait for Greater Anglia to explain
this away, which based on earlier such experiences is likely to take at
least three times round the loop and about a month of elapsed time)
tickets are not just failing to appear in the wallet, but the mechanism
(which they strongly imply ought to exist) to pull them into the wallet,
is nowhere to be seen.

>Obviously you can’t buy something that doesn’t exist, but that was
>not the question.

Indeed, which was about the £100 penalty.
--
Roland Perry

In message <spa1qc$mf$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:14:04 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sp9l43$ok5$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:37:23 on Tue, 14 Dec
>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sp1ut8$f9q$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:20 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 11/12/2021 07:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <7ed7rghlh7i73th432mvlq6h2f1c9nrcaq@4ax.com>, at 20:22:08
>>>>>> on Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:07:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>19:09:15 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 15:38:03 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple
>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts from different sources, several of which are high
>>>>>>>>>>>> volume), so my experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on your
>>>>>>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I rarely
>>>>>>>>>> need to read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most
>>>>>>>>>> can wait until I get back. But I don't have any real
>>>>>>>>>> difficulty reading them when I do need to.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>>>>>> compromise when the train company is insisting on using 1992
>>>>>>>>>>> deliver train tickets, when there are numerous far better
>>>>>>>>>>> more modern ways to do it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs could
>>>>>>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar
>>>>>>>>social media
>>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WhatsApp is, like email, SMS and Usenet, a delivery mechanism, not a
>>>>>>> file format. Just like email, WhatsApp can be used to deliver a PDF
>>>>>>> containing a QR code that forms an e-ticket.
>>>>
>>>>>> Pedantically, that would be an m-ticket (a ticket that's a bearer
>>>>>> bond stored on your mobile phone); e-tickets are entries on a central
>>>>>> database where you present some sort of independently verifiable
>>>>>> credential that they relate to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Outside the terminal nerds who gives a monkeys?
>>>>
>>>> It matters because of the alternative requirements for always-on
>>>> connectivity vs validating [composting?] a ticket before travel.
>>>>
>>>> Modern online train ticketing is rife with warnings that order
>>>> confirmations aren't tickets, and when there's a two-stage process
>>>> involved it can't do any harm for passengers to understand a little
>>>> about the underlying processes.
>>>>
>>>> Where it might really matter is the situation where they've bought
>>>> ticket for someone else. And anti-cloning measures introduced by the
>>>> transport operator might make that next to impossible.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, extended family have been passing around some online theatre
>>>> tickets as people juggle their Covid status, and while some have
>>>> informal processes, others are more tricky. It's hardly ever as simple
>>>> as just handing over a bit of paper.
>>>
>>> The rail industry is removing (removed?) m-tickets, so stop worrying.
>>
>> I would characterise an in-App ticket (as GA and EMR purport to support)
>> as an m-ticket, unless it's an e-ticket in disguise, in which case it
>> would require a facility to export to a different phone to properly
>> qualify.
>
>Well you are alone in that characterisation. At the very basic level, if
>you can screenshot the in-app ticket (or even photograph it with another
>phone) and the copy remains valid it is an e-ticket.

*If* the copy remains valid. Some TOCs specifically exclude a screenshot
from being valid, and other transport operators (buses, I've got
insufficient experience with TOCs) watermark the in-app m-ticket at the
point of display, so that it's obvious (if not already) that it's not
just a static screenshot.

>ie the ticket is simply a pointer to an entry in a remote database. An
>m-ticket is like a real conventional railway ticket, it can’t be
>copied and is the only (realistic) proof that you have a valid ticket.

The question remains: which tickets-in-wallets are indeed pointers, and
which aren't. This requires a lot more forensic study, and not just
speculation.

I'd be happy to do more such studying, but currently can't persuade
anyone to sell me a ticket that appears [either by them pushing it, or
me pulling it, for now I'll waive objections to be forced to do the
latter] in one of those wallets. Which is an obvious pre-requisite!
--
Roland Perry

In message <spa0hn$lrb$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:52:22 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:

>>> TfW introduced their new apps with m-tickets nine days ago and their
>>>integrated new website which will push tickets to your app within the
>>>time it takes to pick up your phone.  So not all the ToCs are
>>>removing m-tickets.

>> Genuine question: are those tickets transferable to a different
>>phone?

>> I'd try that out, as well as the auto-push to the wallet, if I
>>didn't have to set up a fresh account. Well, not this week, anyway.
>
>I don't have any active tickets at the moment to check but I believe
>you can use them

Ahem, you can't use them until after activation, surely?

>on different devices up until the point you activate them.

In which case I'd say they were m-tickets (bearer bonds) at the point at
which the gripper examines them, and not e-tickets (pointers to a
database).
--
Roland Perry

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.

>> What might scupper it (depending on one's definitions) is a soft-launch
>> a day or two early, although of course the opposite is true of the Soham
>> Station re-opening, where the first day of "operation" [tomorrow] will
>> been bustituted!
>>
>> And of course if Brenda is going to drive an inaugural train, to be
>> followed later by the first truly public one, she's hardly likely to
>> want to do that at 5am!
>
>It'll be on the previous day. Ideally, she'd travel from home to the office
>non-stop (Slough to Bond Street), with no publc access to the platforms
>used. But, more likely, she'll be on board for a much shorter journey, in
>the central section.

--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 08:47:44 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <oo89rg11citi141b21k2nufu0s0qn3dgbh@4ax.com>, at 13:17:54 on
>Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:
>
>>What Android does do, by default, unless you tell it not to, is present
>>you with a choice of app to launch in order to view PDFs from within an
>>email. That can be irritating, but you can override that by setting a
>>permanent file association with the app of your choice.
>
>I've scoured the settings of my email app, and can't find that.

It's not going to be part of the email app settings. It's part of the OS
settings, but, as on Windows, an app can the right to open a particular
filetype by getting you to accept its defaults when you install it. If
tapping on a PDF is always launching Adobe Acrobat, rather than giving
you a choice of apps, the it's likely that Acrobat did that on install.
The simplest solution is to uninstall Acrobat and then, if you do need
it, reinstall it but carefully make sure not to accept the defaults when
you do. Otherwise, app file associations can be changed in the Android
settings, but it's a fairly convoluted process.

Mark

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:45:38 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <57vergdjvd1mpct2pab9o4rtf4tb18b9ck@4ax.com>, at 17:15:16 on
>Mon, 13 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:
>>On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:29:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In message <sp0b4a$ro1$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:51:38 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I have no control over the phone, or the apps I'm allowed to use.
>>>>
>>>>Well, there’s your trouble.
>>>
>>>We are where we are. And I won't be the only passenger in the same
>>>circumstances.
>>
>>No, but it does put you in a small minority of the travelling public.
>>The TOCs and ticket vendors, not unreasonably, tend to design their
>>systems for the average traveller.
>
>On one hand you are absolutely right - a significant majority of rail
>journeys are undertaken by holders of season tickets and various
>metro-area PAYG/Concessionary cards (of which Oyster and London Freedom
>Pass are the best known) or metro area CCC PAYG. And last week I did a
>trip on the Docklands light railway using a CCC (a whole £1.70, not a
>ticket I'd have willingly bought in advance or wanted to faff about with
>as a PDF).
>
>On the other hand, taking all those trips out of the equation I doubt
>that my walk-up ticketing requirements are the slightest bit unusual.
>Indeed, I'm sure my use of e|m-ticketing for such things (where
>available) is significantly ahead of the curve.

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.

>>That would be app-specific, obviously. The Gmail app doesn't allow that
>>level of granularity, but does allow notifications to be toggled
>>independently for different accounts. So, for example, you could have
>>allmytickets@gmail with notifications switched on, and othermail@gmail
>>with notifications switched off.
>
>So that's back to externalising the burden of filtering to the user by
>having multiple email addresses with one exclusively for travel tickets
>(something again I'm sure the average traveller doesn't do) rather than
>being able to say "beep if anything arrives from
>
> auto-confirm.greateranglia@trainsfares.co.uk "
>
>Which isn't an address I think we could guess in advance anyway (that's
>where tickets bought from their app arrive from).

Most people probably get so few emails that they don't mind getting
notified for all of them. People who get more than a handful of emails a
day are, by and large, either techies or politicians. The former are
perfectly capable of setting up their email systems so as to make the
system work for them rather than them having to work for the system. The
latter will just have to lump it.

Mark

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).

>OTOH, I have seen the occasional user of a chair/buggy have a card
>(maybe a Freedom Pass, maybe not) touched in by a companion.

--
Roland Perry

In message <spa2fs$5m9$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:25:32 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>> TfW introduced their new apps with m-tickets nine days ago and their
>>>> integrated new website which will push tickets to your app within the
>>>> time it takes to pick up your phone.  So not all the ToCs are removing
>>>> m-tickets.
>>>
>>> Genuine question: are those tickets transferable to a different phone?
>>>
>>> I'd try that out, as well as the auto-push to the wallet, if I didn't
>>> have to set up a fresh account. Well, not this week, anyway.
>>
>> I don't have any active tickets at the moment to check but I believe you
>> can use them on different devices up until the point you activate them.
>
>From the TfW website
>
>An mTicket is a ticket contained within a mobile phone app that displays as
>a barcode.
>
>It must be activated prior to use and is available to be purchased for most
>journeys through the TfW website and App.

Sounds OK. Some TOCs are hopelessly confused about the terminology, and
even use both expressions is the same breath. TfW look fine.

>An eTicket is an electronic ticket that includes a barcode sent as a PDF in
>an e-mail.

It's more about the "pointer" nature than the delivery mechanism, or
indeed the type of pointer. Just an eight-or-some such code would
normally be sufficient. That's all you need for TOD, after all, and
obviously points to a central database so they can print the paper
tickets out for you.

>The eTicket can be saved to a mobile phone or printed out but is only valid
>for single use

That's true of all tickets (apart from seasons/rovers) so what are they
getting at?

>and only available on some TfW Advance tickets.

Do they mean "only ever available for advance tickets, and then, only a
subset of them; specifically also, only TfW AP tickets, not other TOC's
AP tickets"

or: "you'll find a subset of TfW AP tickets can't be delivered like
this, but all the rest can".

>======
>
>From this it seems reasonable to infer that TfW doesn’t have the
>infrastructure to cope with e-tickets, and this might simply due to poor
>availability of real time communications in some parts of Wales, or just
>poor capital investment. They can cope with Advances as e-tickets as they
>are effectively self composting, as you can only use them on a specific
>train.

I think you are conflating composting with anti-cloning. Obviously two
people sat in the same seat is somewhat self-policing.

--
Roland Perry

In message <sp7u3g$hvc$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:58:24 on Mon, 13 Dec
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sp227c$g5s$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:31:56 on Sat, 11 Dec
>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> Obviously I’m only seeing this through the prism of, mainly Roland’s,
>>>> second hand reports. However it seems that Android has useability issues.
>>>
>>> No, not normal Android phones, whose ysers can vuew PDFs perfectly well
>>> without any Adobe software or any need to log into any service. Just the
>>> 'special', second-hand ones Roland uses.
>>
>> Intriguing. Can you explain why a secondhand phone is less capable than
>> one of the same age, owned from new?
>
>Its current owner.

No, that doesn't explain it at all.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sp2k8l$3md$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:39:49 on Sat, 11 Dec
2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:

>>> Are you Android users saying that the supplied web browser doesn’t support
>>> viewing pdfs?
>>
>> What I'm saying is that the email app, when asked to display a PDF
>> attachment, launches Adobe viewer, which it appears I'm not the only
>> person unwilling to sign-in-to.
>>
>> I can't see a "setting" in the email app to launch a browser instead.
>
>I have an Android phone and use the FastMail app, which seems happy enough
>to display PDFs without invoking any other software.

Interesting. I've yet to find an offline mail client with that
functionality.

>It gives me the option of downloading attachments and I also have an
>Adobe Acrobat Reader which I don’t ever remember configuring and it
>certainly doesn’t ask me to log into anything. It does have an ad on
>the front screen offering a free trial of extra features. Based on
>experience of my desktop iMac there is another Acrobat Reader (DC?)
>which does a keep asking you to log in, and I’ve deleted that one
>because of that nagware characteristic; Apple’s Preview works perfectly well.

Once again, I'm glad it all works for you, but pretty sure you will t
some point in the past have signed-in to Adobe (and it's remembering
that).
--
Roland Perry

In message <puahrghpk13hqjvcqr1k6j9mqmat6rq3s5@4ax.com>, at 14:42:38 on
Tue, 14 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:45:38 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <57vergdjvd1mpct2pab9o4rtf4tb18b9ck@4ax.com>, at 17:15:16 on
>>Mon, 13 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>>>On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:29:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In message <sp0b4a$ro1$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:51:38 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>>2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I have no control over the phone, or the apps I'm allowed to use.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, there’s your trouble.
>>>>
>>>>We are where we are. And I won't be the only passenger in the same
>>>>circumstances.
>>>
>>>No, but it does put you in a small minority of the travelling public.
>>>The TOCs and ticket vendors, not unreasonably, tend to design their
>>>systems for the average traveller.
>>
>>On one hand you are absolutely right - a significant majority of rail
>>journeys are undertaken by holders of season tickets and various
>>metro-area PAYG/Concessionary cards (of which Oyster and London Freedom
>>Pass are the best known) or metro area CCC PAYG. And last week I did a
>>trip on the Docklands light railway using a CCC (a whole £1.70, not a
>>ticket I'd have willingly bought in advance or wanted to faff about with
>>as a PDF).
>>
>>On the other hand, taking all those trips out of the equation I doubt
>>that my walk-up ticketing requirements are the slightest bit unusual.
>>Indeed, I'm sure my use of e|m-ticketing for such things (where
>>available) is significantly ahead of the curve.
>
>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.

>>>That would be app-specific, obviously. The Gmail app doesn't allow that
>>>level of granularity, but does allow notifications to be toggled
>>>independently for different accounts. So, for example, you could have
>>>allmytickets@gmail with notifications switched on, and othermail@gmail
>>>with notifications switched off.
>>
>>So that's back to externalising the burden of filtering to the user by
>>having multiple email addresses with one exclusively for travel tickets
>>(something again I'm sure the average traveller doesn't do) rather than
>>being able to say "beep if anything arrives from
>>
>> auto-confirm.greateranglia@trainsfares.co.uk "
>>
>>Which isn't an address I think we could guess in advance anyway (that's
>>where tickets bought from their app arrive from).
>
>Most people probably get so few emails that they don't mind getting
>notified for all of them. People who get more than a handful of emails a
>day are, by and large, either techies or politicians. The former are
>perfectly capable of setting up their email systems so as to make the
>system work for them rather than them having to work for the system. The
>latter will just have to lump it.

You've just created a massive excluded-middle of people who get loads of
emails and aren't either techies or politicians.

A relative who worked as a senior administrative manager at a secondary
school once told me she got about one email a minute all day long. And
no, they didn't have a budget to hire an assistant.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sp1urd$f9q$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:34:21 on Sat, 11 Dec
2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 11/12/2021 07:43, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <sp01g1$1nah$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 17:07:13 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at 19:09:15 on
>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>15:38:03 on
>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple email
>>>>>>>accounts
>>>>>>> from different sources, several of which are high volume), so my
>>>>>>> experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on your
>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I rarely need to
>>>>> read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most of them can wait
>>>>> until I get back. But I don't have any real difficulty reading
>>>>>them when
>>>>> I do need to.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>compromise
>>>>>> when the train company is insisting on using 1992 technology to
>>>>>>deliver
>>>>>> train tickets, when there are numerous far better more modern
>>>>>>ways to do
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan of having
>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs could
>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>
>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>
>>> PDFs work everywhere.

>> Sadly not, you need a PDF viewer installed, and often the one
>>shoving itself to the head of the queue is Adobe, and they demand you
>>"sign in with your Facebook password". No thanks.
>
>It's not a demand, it's an option. Stop using apocalyptic language and
>read what is actually written and you might find life gets a lot
>simpler.

I didn't see a button marked "carry on as a guest/without signing in".
--
Roland Perry

In message <5vSpYjk5FLuhFArq@perry.uk>, at 15:00:09 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <sp7u3g$hvc$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:58:24 on Mon, 13 Dec
>2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp227c$g5s$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:31:56 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> Obviously I’m only seeing this through the prism of, mainly Roland’s,
>>>>> second hand reports. However it seems that Android has useability issues.
>>>>
>>>> No, not normal Android phones, whose ysers can vuew PDFs perfectly well
>>>> without any Adobe software or any need to log into any service. Just the
>>>> 'special', second-hand ones Roland uses.
>>>
>>> Intriguing. Can you explain why a secondhand phone is less capable than
>>> one of the same age, owned from new?
>>
>>Its current owner.
>
>No, that doesn't explain it at all.

<pressed send too soon> Two reasons: I doubt my computer literacy is
deeply affected by deploying a second-user phone (even one that's only a
few months old, I'm pretty sure the previous one was an unwanted "free
upgrade", but it's possible they unlocked it for resale); and my current
smartphones are both first-user, albeit the personal one bought on
clearance.

--
Roland Perry

In message <sp9pvt$1rdg$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:00:32 on Tue, 14 Dec
2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 08:44:31 +0000
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <sp1vdd$u0s$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:43:57 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>itself to the head of the queue is Adobe, and they demand you "sign in
>>>>with your Facebook password". No thanks.
>>>
>>>You are aware of who owns whatsapp arn't you?
>>
>>I don't think it's Adobe. The company whose software is so wobbly they
>>have to issue security updates far more frequently than one would like.
>
>When you use WhatsApp you have to sign up to Facebooks T&Cs.

So what? Although I think I joined before Facebook bought them.

>>>Quite. Paper tickets are universal, just work and should always be an option.
>>
>>Perhaps you should read the thread, then you'd realise the ONLY REASON
>>for it is to discuss the situation where paper tickets aren't available
>>because the TVMs are broken.
>
>If the ticket machines are broken then not buying a ticket is option #2.
>If there's someone on the train selling them then great, otherwise you pay at
>the other end. Or if there's no barriers then a free trip.

The problem is the signs which say travelling without a ticket will get
you a (soon to be £100) penalty.
--
Roland Perry

In message <mkahrg5l9rlm3c0lnsra68rrmgl94v5s0d@4ax.com>, at 14:34:32 on
Tue, 14 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 08:47:44 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <oo89rg11citi141b21k2nufu0s0qn3dgbh@4ax.com>, at 13:17:54 on
>>Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>>
>>>What Android does do, by default, unless you tell it not to, is present
>>>you with a choice of app to launch in order to view PDFs from within an
>>>email. That can be irritating, but you can override that by setting a
>>>permanent file association with the app of your choice.
>>
>>I've scoured the settings of my email app, and can't find that.
>
>It's not going to be part of the email app settings. It's part of the OS
>settings, but, as on Windows, an app can the right to open a particular
>filetype by getting you to accept its defaults when you install it. If
>tapping on a PDF is always launching Adobe Acrobat, rather than giving
>you a choice of apps, the it's likely that Acrobat did that on install.
>The simplest solution is to uninstall Acrobat and then, if you do need
>it, reinstall it but carefully make sure not to accept the defaults when
>you do.

I've done that the other day (seemed like a sensible precaution) but it
never asked anything.

>Otherwise, app file associations can be changed in the Android
>settings, but it's a fairly convoluted process.

Ten minutes later! OK, have ejected Adobe as the default, and now I can
choose "Drive PDF Viewer", not an app I've come across previously.

Another five minutes later... apparently part of "Google Drive", which
goes on to reveal it's not been used in over a year.
--
Roland Perry

On 14/12/2021 12:21, Recliner wrote:
> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 13/12/2021 16:35, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t9s9rgts5sfakjo1d78082i3c5il3c1cve@4ax.com>, at 18:55:52 on
>>> Sat, 11 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 13:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WhatsApp has an API, which can be used to send a message to any number
>>>>>> registered with WhatsApp even if it isn't already known to you. So it
>>>>>> can be integrated into an online retail environment in a way which
>>>>>> allows a customer to supply their phone number and the system to then
>>>>>> send a message via WhatsApp to that number. From a business
>>>>>> perspective,
>>>>>> this is a very useful means of communicating with customers as
>>>>>> sending a
>>>>>> WhatsApp message is free, unlike SMS. Plus, of course, you can send
>>>>>> attachments, which you can't easily do with SMS. Abd unlike email and
>>>>>> SMS, WhatsApp has a delivery feedback mechanism built in so you know if
>>>>>> your message has reached the recipient.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The downside, at the moment, is that access to the API is strictly
>>>>>> controlled (which it has to be, in order to prevent spammers using it),
>>>>>> and there are several hoops to jump through in order to get a Business
>>>>>> WhatsApp Account and be eligible for the API. So there are not, yet,
>>>>>> many organisations using it. But, in the long run, I expect it to
>>>>>> become
>>>>>> one of the primary means whereby businesses communicate with customers.
>>>>>
>>>>> The real problem is tying your retail delivery system into a third party
>>>>> owned proprietary system, owned by an outfit with ever diminishing
>>>>> public
>>>>> and political trust.
>>>>
>>>> The point is that if you are selling a product which can be delivered
>>>> digitally, then it makes sense, from a customer service perspective, to
>>>> offer multiple means of delivery. Even assuming that the primary means
>>>> remains email (which is likely, at least for the foreseeable future), it
>>>> would be a useful add-on for ticket vendors to be able to have an extra,
>>>> optional field on the order page which says something like "Enter your
>>>> phone number here to get the ticket sent to you via WhatsApp". That
>>>> doesn't override, or replace, the email delivery mechanism, but it would
>>>> be useful for a large number of customers. If WhatsApp ever goes out of
>>>> fashion, or is supplanted by a different IM system, then alternatives
>>>> which offer a similar API facility could be implemented instead of, or
>>>> even alongside, WhatsApp.
>>>>
>>>> Offering WhatsApp as an optional delivery mechanism is no more tying you
>>>> in to anything than offering traditional postal delivery of a printed
>>>> ticket ties you in to Royal Mail, or offering TVM printing ties you in
>>>> the machinery. On the contrary, the more different delivery mechanisms
>>>> you can offer, the less you and your customers are reliant on any single
>>>> one of them.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy if a train company with a train ticket booking app, could
>>> be arsed to send the tickets to that App's existing ticket wallet.
>>> Apparently Greater Anglia can't.
>>
>> That is a major problem. The railway companies are seemingly incapable
>> of agreeing on a simple, universal and reliable system that will
>> function everywhere throughout the network. Instead, a lot of TOCs seem
>> to want their own, often incompatible, Apps.
>> And can we expect DfT to produce something simple, universal and
>> comprehensible to non-tech users ? I doubt it.
>
> Not the DfT, but GBR. But probably not any time soon.
>

Yes - but will GBR be anything more than a puppet, with the treasury
pulling the strings (via DfT) ?

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spa1qc$mf$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:14:04 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp9l43$ok5$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:37:23 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sp1ut8$f9q$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:20 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 11/12/2021 07:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <7ed7rghlh7i73th432mvlq6h2f1c9nrcaq@4ax.com>, at 20:22:08
>>>>>>> on Fri, 10 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:07:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 19:09:15 on
>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:20:29 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ub84rg1q1cu4uqd19rfbjrsvs6u3u98a1u@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 15:38:03 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my use case seems to be similar to yours (multiple
>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts from different sources, several of which are high
>>>>>>>>>>>>> volume), so my experience seems to me to be relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But how often do you read a hundred emails a day via Gmail on your
>>>>>>>>>>>> phone?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not very often, because my job is very office based so I rarely
>>>>>>>>>>> need to read large numbers of emails while out and about. Most
>>>>>>>>>>> can wait until I get back. But I don't have any real
>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty reading them when I do need to.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is what Spark claims to be better at, but it's still a
>>>>>>>>>>>> compromise when the train company is insisting on using 1992
>>>>>>>>>>>> deliver train tickets, when there are numerous far better
>>>>>>>>>>>> more modern ways to do it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs could
>>>>>>>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar
>>>>>>>>> social media
>>>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WhatsApp is, like email, SMS and Usenet, a delivery mechanism, not a
>>>>>>>> file format. Just like email, WhatsApp can be used to deliver a PDF
>>>>>>>> containing a QR code that forms an e-ticket.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pedantically, that would be an m-ticket (a ticket that's a bearer
>>>>>>> bond stored on your mobile phone); e-tickets are entries on a central
>>>>>>> database where you present some sort of independently verifiable
>>>>>>> credential that they relate to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Outside the terminal nerds who gives a monkeys?
>>>>>
>>>>> It matters because of the alternative requirements for always-on
>>>>> connectivity vs validating [composting?] a ticket before travel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modern online train ticketing is rife with warnings that order
>>>>> confirmations aren't tickets, and when there's a two-stage process
>>>>> involved it can't do any harm for passengers to understand a little
>>>>> about the underlying processes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where it might really matter is the situation where they've bought
>>>>> ticket for someone else. And anti-cloning measures introduced by the
>>>>> transport operator might make that next to impossible.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, extended family have been passing around some online theatre
>>>>> tickets as people juggle their Covid status, and while some have
>>>>> informal processes, others are more tricky. It's hardly ever as simple
>>>>> as just handing over a bit of paper.
>>>>
>>>> The rail industry is removing (removed?) m-tickets, so stop worrying.
>>>
>>> I would characterise an in-App ticket (as GA and EMR purport to support)
>>> as an m-ticket, unless it's an e-ticket in disguise, in which case it
>>> would require a facility to export to a different phone to properly
>>> qualify.
>>
>> Well you are alone in that characterisation. At the very basic level, if
>> you can screenshot the in-app ticket (or even photograph it with another
>> phone) and the copy remains valid it is an e-ticket.
>
> *If* the copy remains valid. Some TOCs specifically exclude a screenshot
> from being valid, and other transport operators (buses, I've got
> insufficient experience with TOCs) watermark the in-app m-ticket at the
> point of display, so that it's obvious (if not already) that it's not
> just a static screenshot.
>
That’s exactly the point. If the copy remains valid it’s an e-ticket. You
can make up whatever private incorrect classification system you like, but
he fact remains that an e-ticket is a pointer and an m-ticket is the actual
ticket.