Re: the safe-for-auto status would be included with the mapping data
The proviso being that if say a contra-flow is setup on a stretch of road, the mapping data gets updated ahead of the event, in a way that does not give a false impression of current state. For example,
(1) road works are planned
(2) mapping data is updated to say "disable auto"
(3) road works are put in place
(4) if auto driving is permitted during the road works: mapping data is changed to allow auto under revised road layout
(5) road works are signalled as being complete but traffic rerouting still in place: mapping data changed to disable auto
(6) road works rerouting removed
(7) default "enable auto" status is restored to the mapping data.
Each stage is important, the only "safe" out of step stages that can be made are to skips steps (4) and (5).
If this is one hell of a palaver, the answer to that is: well, this is the consequence of wanting auto-driving capability. It is not needed if we continue without that capability.
London Underground deal with safety as if it were a military campaign. Bringing automation onto the roads needs to be dealt with under exactly the same conditions. If not then eventually legislation will be brought in to make it mandatory... in exactly the same way that the rail and air industries have been forced to do historically.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
