Skip to content

Add NewRoutes to GTFS-RT to support dynamic service (#606)#621

Open
cleveramarquet wants to merge 1 commit intogoogle:masterfrom
cleveramarquet:cleveramarquet-add-new-routes-proposal
Open

Add NewRoutes to GTFS-RT to support dynamic service (#606)#621
cleveramarquet wants to merge 1 commit intogoogle:masterfrom
cleveramarquet:cleveramarquet-add-new-routes-proposal

Conversation

@cleveramarquet
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Description

This proposal introduces a NewRoutes message to the FeedEntity in GTFS Realtime. As discussed in Issue #606, the current specification lacks a standard way to define route metadata for services that do not exist in the static GTFS schedule.

The full technical specification and field definitions can be found in the GTFS-NewRoutes Google Doc.

By allowing a Route to be defined directly within the real-time feed, consumers can provide a complete and accurate experience for riders without requiring agencies to "reuse" unrelated static IDs.

Implementations

Call for Vote

I am calling for a vote for Official Adoption of this proposal as a functional change.

  • Voting Period: Ends at 23:59:59 UTC on April 23, 2026 (14 days from now).
  • Requirement: At least 3 "Yes" votes and no "No" votes (unanimous consensus) are required.

Add NewRoutes to proto

// See definition of routes.route_type in (CSV) GTFS.
// Required
optional RouteType route_type = 6;
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@leonardehrenfried leonardehrenfried Apr 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As I did in the Google doc, I'm requesting this to be changed to an int so it can reflect the full range of extended route types. As a benefit this enum would then not have to be kept in sync with static GTFS.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

cc @hbruch

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see your point about the extended route types. However, I used an enum here to stay consistent with how the rest of the current GTFS-RT specification handles route types. Perhaps we could stick with the enum for this PR to keep the scope focused on NewRoutes, and then address a global move to int32 for route types across the entire spec in a separate proposal?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants