Driver/steering position issues

[nickrbb]

This PR addresses two identified issues:

1. Vehicle.Cabin.DriverPosition values can be 'LEFT', 'MIDDLE', 'RIGHT'. However, Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel.Position can only be 'FRONT_LEFT', 'FRONT_RIGHT', meaning that there is a possibility that the steering position and driver position cannot be set the same when the driver/steering position is in the middle.

• Suggested fix: Remove Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel.Position entirely, since this is an overlap with Vehicle.Cabin.DriverPosition.
• Cleanest solution, especially since in VSS v4.0 we don’t have to worry about backwards incompatibility.
• Note: There are other leaf nodes under the Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel branch that should of course remain

2. Vehicle.Cabin.DriverPosition default value is ‘LEFT’. However, it is unclear why this needs a default value since other signals that are restricted to Allowed Values do not have a Default Value specified. Furthermore, specifying a default of ‘LEFT’ increases the chances of right-hand drive vehicles being misconfigured (e.g. because the implementer forgot to actually assign it a specific value), which could affect up to 54 of 195 UN recognised countries (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-_and_right-hand_traffic#Worldwide_distribution_by_country). In a worse case scenario, such a misconfiguration could wrongly infer to national authorities that the vehicle is illegal in that country due to some countries prohibiting registration of vehicles with steering wheels on the “wrong side” of the vehicle (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-_and_right-hand_traffic#Legality_of_wrong-hand-drive_vehicles_by_country).

• Suggested fix: Remove default value of Vehicle.Cabin.DriverPosition.
• This then gives better assurance of correct vehicle configuration by forcing implementers to actually set this value in their deployments rather than (possibly inadvertently) relying on a default value which will be wrong in at least 28% of UN recognised countries, as well as in vehicles whose steering is located in the middle (e.g. some sports cars, motorbikes/mopeds, etc). A blank/null value is easily caught in testing and therefore can be rectified early.

[erikbosch]

I triggered the build - needed for first time contributors.

DCO-check fails, all commits shall include a sign-off, see https://www.covesa.global/contribute

So before being merged the commits shall be updated to include a sign-off. They can also be squashed first if you like. Apart from that I think the PR is OK and could be included for VSS 4.0 if no-one has any objections so it can be improved at latest May 2nd.

[nickrbb]

Happy to merge the commits and add a sign-off. Is there some easy way to do the merging of the commits here in the web interface, or do I need to do them locally in the branch of my fork and then push the updates to this PR?

[nickrbb]

OK, I've now squashed the two commits and added the sign-off in the commit message. Let me know anything else I need to do.

[SebastianSchildt]

Both changes make sense to me: I think e sort of agreed that default should not be used in standard catalogue anyway, as this is more deployment specific information.

Also, I agree SteeringWheel Position is redundant. (We might want to model something later about the position of the steering column on cars where you can higher/lower the steering wheel, but this is not what the original point meant to capture)

[erikbosch]

Meeting note: merge