Skip to main content

Smartcard Interoperability Issues for the Transit Industry (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Chapter 8 - Conclusions
Pages 87-91

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 87...
... If an existing governing body presides over the transit agencies in the region and has a strong engineering support staff, then logically that governing body should lead the regional fare collection effort. If neither of these previous conditions exists, then the project should be led by a management committee that represents each of the agencies in the region.
Read the entire page →
From page 88...
... Multiple vendors may provide a more competitive contract process, but the management is more complex and costlier. Given the many individual schedules that must be coordinated, the multiple vendor contract approach may lead to a longer elapsed time between the project inception and deployment when compared with the single procurement contract model.
Read the entire page →
From page 89...
... A minimum set of data elements common to all systems must be defined and used. This set of data should consist of information about the cardholder, including card identification number, card issuer identification, patron profile code, and card validity period, and information about Conclusions 89
Read the entire page →
From page 90...
... Also, adopting a regional data standard that meets the minimum data element set, such as the RIS or the Universal Transit Farecard Standards (UTFS) , is highly desirable and essential if intraregional operability between regions is desired.
Read the entire page →
From page 91...
... If transit agencies collectively resolve to make using these standards a high priority in system development and procurement projects, the cause of smartcard interoperability in transit AFC systems will be greatly advanced. Conclusions 91
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • transit industry
  • lead agency
  • transit agencies
  • smartcard transaction
  • smartcard implementations

  • interoperability issues
  • electronic fare
  • host controller
  • validity period
  • business logic

  • regional planning
  • fare media
  • management committee
  • security model
  • card interoperability

  • data exchange
  • data standard
  • transmission protocol
  • command set
  • radio frequency

  • fare payments
  • emerging afc
  • data model
  • governing body
  • planning organization

  • smart card
  • cid model
  • data elements
  • personal identification
  • contract approach


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.