Home » railML newsgroups » railml.infrastructure » Connection on TrackBegin and TrackEnd (Connection on TrackBegin and TrackEnd generate unnecessary tracks)
Connection on TrackBegin and TrackEnd [message #1351] Tue, 08 March 2016 13:26 Go to next message
Torben Brand is currently offline  Torben Brand
Messages: 28
Registered: March 2016
Junior Member
Since this is my first forum post (finally) I will give a short introduction to myself. My name is Torben Brand and I am the railML coordinator for the Norwegian national rail administration, Jernbaneverket. I primarily work as a railway capacity engineer. Here I work a lot with the railML programs Opentrack, Treno and Viriato. As a half German I also speak fluent German.

My issue is the following:
Sometimes you have to split a track in two graphically. For instance due to the display or sheet size, you have to continue on a new row below. I will refer to this as a visual connector from now on. In railML today this would generate two tracks. This makes the model unnecessary complex and less human readable.
I propose to handle this visual connector in the visualization in railML, instead of splitting the track.

Suggestions to solutions could be:
1) Allowing for two positions under <trackElementVis>. The programs would have to interpret this as a visual connector.
2) Allowing for two positions under <trackElementVis> with a new child element <ConnectorVis> to indicate that it's a visual connector.
3) Having two identical references <trackElementVis> with two different <positions>. This combined with suggestion 1. or 2.
4) If double positions or double references in <trackElementVis> are not to be allowed. Then use either the <trackElement> child <geoMappings> or a new child element <trackConVis>in combination with another <trackElement> child with a length of 0 meters between them to describe the track elements of the visual connector. A new child element <ConnectorVis> under <trackElementVis> will indicate that it's a visual connector and there should not be drawn a track between them.

I am looking forward to vivid discussions on this matter... ;-)
Re: Connection on TrackBegin and TrackEnd [message #1353 is a reply to message #1351] Fri, 08 April 2016 15:53 Go to previous message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 46
Registered: January 2016
Member
Hello Torben,

Am 09.03.2016 um 14:17 schrieb Torben Brand:
> Since this is my first forum post (finally) I will give a
> short introduction to myself. My name is Torben Brand and I
> am the railML coordinator for the Norwegian national rail
> administration, Jernbaneverket. I primarily work as a
> railway capacity engineer. Here I work a lot with the railML
> programs Opentrack, Treno and Viriato. As a half German I
> also speak fluent German.

Welcome to the railML forum!

> My issue is the following:
> Sometimes you have to split a track in two graphically. For
> instance due to the display or sheet size, you have to
> continue on a new row below. I will refer to this as a
> visual connector from now on. In railML today this would
> generate two tracks. This makes the model unnecessary
> complex and less human readable.
> I propose to handle this visual connector in the
> visualization in railML, instead of splitting the track.
>
> Suggestions to solutions could be:
> 1) Allowing for two positions under <trackElementVis>. The
> programs would have to interpret this as a visual
> connector.
> [...]

The main problem we are facing with all your suggested solutions is that
the infrastructure visualization branch has been marked deprecated with
railML version 2.2. However, we have to find a solution for the use case
you described. How this solution may look like, can be discussed with
the community here and at our next railML.org meeting. I am interested
in your opinions.

Thank you very much and best regards
Christian

--
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
Previous Topic: Additional attribute for crossing roads/rivers
Next Topic: How to mix switches and crossings en connections ?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Aug 18 05:13:00 CEST 2017