Add that shapes should be included #470
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
isabelle-dr
added
GTFS Schedule
|
This PR has been open for at least 7 calendar days. I assume the lack of discussion in the PR means most comments were made in issue #459. As per the Spec Amendment Process, I am opening a vote for making You can find previous discussions on the topic in issue #459. |
isabelle-dr
added
the
Status: Voting
|
+1 from TransSee TransSee relies on shape data heavily and is significantly degraded when it's not present. |
|
+1 Transit |
|
+1 Trillium |
|
+1 OpenGeo |
|
+1 from @interline-io |
|
+1 Caltrans |
|
+1 @mbta |
|
+1 strada360 |
|
+1 GMV |
|
The voting period ended on 2024-07-17 at 23:59:59 UTC. With 9 votes in favor and no votes against, the vote passes.
Thank you to everyone who participated! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Context
This PR follow-up on issue #45, which received good engagement.
This originated form an issue by @e-lo for the GTFS Schedule Best Practices.
We'd like to eventually have the Best Practices and the specifications consolidated into one document, so we are incorporating new Best Practices directly into the spec (see efforts to merge the specifications and Best Practices here and here).
Proposal
This PR adds the following mention in shapes.txt description:
Given that zone-based services can now be modeled in GTFS and don't need
shapes.txtdefined, I didn't modify the Presence type of shapes.txt to Recommended, and rather chose a "should" statement in its description.Note that merging this PR means we'd add a WARNING in the Canonical GTFS Schedule Validator, which is the severity level for all GTFS Best Practices (spec should & recommended + everything in the Best Practices).