Last checked at 2024-06-26.
| Quality check | Quality |
|---|---|
| Uses data standard? | ✅ GBFS |
| Updated <= 30s? | ✅ |
| Correct PROW? | ✅ |
| All NL data? | ✅ |
| Includes vehicle type? | ❌ |
| Offers service areas | ❌ |
Status: 🟡 Usable though needs improvement
- The data feed uses one of the supported standards 👍
- The feed is updated frequently 👍
- We have to check if the data specification is followed perfectly
- Cargoroo offers data of all vehicles 👍
- Cargoroo does not offer 'vehicle type' in their data feed yet ❌
The current status is 'usable though needs improvement'. As soon as vehicle type is included in the datafeed, the status will be 🟢 Perfect.
🆕 The operator should communicate what kind of vehicle it's reporting.
Since GBFS 2.1 there's a field, vehicle_type_id, that defines what kind of vehicle is offered.
Please start offering vehicle type in the feed, following the GBFS' standard.
To do this, you can use these documentation pages:
- Add vehicle_types.json
- In free_bike_status.json, add property vehicle_type_id
As values you can use the latest standard definition for electric cargo bikes:
- form_factor:
cargo_bicycle - propulsion_type:
electric_assist - max_range_meters:
X1 - wheel_count:
X2 - max_permitted_speed:
X3 - rated_power:
X4
To see an example, see page 2 of this document.
| Updated | Description |
|---|---|
| 2024-01-25 | Otto heeft datakwaliteitscontrole gedaan door data van Cargoroo te vergelijken met die in het Dashboard Deelmobiliteit. Hieruit kwam dat de aantallen volgens het Dashboard iets tot behoorlijk lager zijn dan in de controledata die Cargoroo ons mailde. Dit waren de aantallen die Cargoroo mailde met in haakjes erbij wat in het Dashboard stond voor periode september 2023. Wij gaan onderzoeken waar de verschillen vandaan komen. |
Arnhem 19 (dd 3)
Nijmegen 49 (dd 18)
Eindhoven 50 (dd 36)
Rotterdam 99 (dd 89)
Amsterdam en Diemen 134 (dd 117)
Utrecht 186 (dd 180)
Den Haag en Rijswijk 222 (dd 192)