The vote is now closed. Here is the tally.
Result: 83.3% Yes
We need at least 80% yes for experimental GTFS-RT features per the official process, so this proposal passes.
Note: I will modify the comment describing the `carriage_sequence` field as suggested by @juanborre and @barbeau in this GitHub comment, unless someone wants to change their vote if this change in the comment is made.
Thanks to everyone who contributed to this proposal.
We need to consider and handle the case -
For car ordering or car position, it will be done regardless of the direction of travel -
For many trains and train operators, generally, the train Consists always remains the same, and stay in the same order, with the car adjacent to the locomotive always being termed as Car # 1 and the next car as # 2, then Car # 3 and so on.
So, the reporting of Car # 1 may need to remain the same, particularly with the AMTRAK Capitol Corridor CCJPA. In some other transit systems, it may not be the same.
Even though the train may be going in either direction, the locomotive is many times always on one side and would be either pulling or pushing (behind the cars) the train coaches.
Car 1 is always adjacent to the locomotive, regardless of the direction of travel.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GTFS-realtime" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gtfs-realtim...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gtfs-realtime/fcf705d8-1403-47db-8ba1-dc5c3bf69cfbn%40googlegroups.com.
For multi-car occupancy, “order of Car numbering may not be flipped every time the train direction of travel is changed”.
Carriage Sequence is always going to be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
The first occurrence of the repeated field will represent the first car or vehicle, given the direction of travel is not always true generally with rail operations and passenger rail industry, specially in the case of AMTRAK Capitol Corridor and this needs to be accounted for, to have an operator view of the same.
There needs to be a special case for this consideration.