Home » RailTopoModel newsgroup » RailTopoModel » Wording remarks to IRS30100 (Collective thread to all verbalisation or wordings in the IRS30100 (Version April 19th, 2016))
Wording remarks to IRS30100 [message #1373] Thu, 23 June 2016 13:54 Go to next message
Felix Prüter is currently offline  Felix Prüter
Messages: 16
Registered: June 2016
Location: Berlin
Junior Member
Hello,
we (SIGNON Deutschland GmbH) are validating the use of RailTopoModel as the base model for several railway-related applications dealing with various proprietary infrastructure input data. For that reason, I studied the IRS 30100. Now I have several questions and remarks for which I will open seperate topics.

The first remark is just a wording topic: (p.14, 2nd. par.)
Quote:
...since resources are identified HERE as...

It's not clear and hard to find out what HERE references to.
For me it references the TRADITIONAL REPRESENTATION, right?

Regards
Felix Prüter
SIGNON Deutschland GmbH

[Updated on: Thu, 23 June 2016 21:36] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

IRS 30100 wording remarks [message #1374 is a reply to message #1373] Thu, 23 June 2016 14:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Felix Prüter is currently offline  Felix Prüter
Messages: 16
Registered: June 2016
Location: Berlin
Junior Member
Hello,
here are some more wording remarks to the IRS 30100:

p.30, last note:
the part after the last comma seems superfluously

ch 6.2.11, z2nd par:
the description about the relation between PositioningNetElement und AssociatedPositioningElement is wrong.
APS is contained by PNE!

ch 6.3.6:
defines the generic concept of a coordinate in a POSITIONING (not referencing) system

ch 6.3.7, 2nd sentence:
Should be two sentences
1. value range of attribute intrinsicCoord 0..1
2. Arbitrary amount of associated PositioningSystemCoordinate instances

ch 6.4.5:
in reference to one OR MORE PositioningNetElement
according to Figure 72 only ONE!

ch 6.4.5:
Attribute applicationDirection: direction of the LINEARLOCATION?
better: LinearElement?

ch 6.4.9:
between a LinearLocation and PositioningSystemCoordinate INSTANCES (is missing)

Kind regards
Felix
SIGNON Deutschland GmbH
icon14.gif  Re: Wording remarks to IRS30100 [message #1383 is a reply to message #1373] Thu, 23 June 2016 21:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
vpkolmorgen
Messages: 31
Registered: November 2004
Member
Dear Mr. Prüter,

thank you very much for your critical look about UIC's IRS30100 in the current state. The colleagues of the RailTopoModel Ing Expert Group will take the notices into consideration. Due to the holiday times it may take some time.

Please let's use this thread for all issues relating verbalisation, phrasings or wordings relating the IRS30100 version presented during the 6th UIC RailTopoModel conference on April 19th, 2016.

Best regards,
--
MSc. Vasco Paul Kolmorgen
railML.org Coordinator
D-01069 Dresden; Germany www.railml.org
Re: Wordng remark to irs 30100 [message #1387 is a reply to message #1373] Mon, 27 June 2016 11:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 46
Registered: January 2016
Member
Dear Felix,

Am 23.06.2016 um 18:13 schrieb Felix Prüter:
> [...]
> The first remark is just a wording topic: (p.14, 2nd. par.)
> Quote:
>> ...since resources are identified HERE as...
>
> It's not clear and hard to find out what HERE references
> to.
> For me it references the TRADITIONAL REPRESENTATION, right?
> [...]

Yes, "here" stands for "traditional representation". This clarification
has to be added in the text.

Thanks and best regards
Christian

--
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
Re: IRS 30100 wording remarks [message #1398 is a reply to message #1374] Fri, 19 August 2016 16:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 46
Registered: January 2016
Member
Dear Felix!

Your points were analysed by members of the RTM expert group. The
question concerning "ch 6.3.7, 2nd sentence" seems to be a
misunderstanding and will be addressed by clarifying the documentation.
The other items will be updated along your line of reasoning.

Best regards
Christian

Am 23.06.2016 um 21:28 schrieb Felix Prüter:
> Hello,
> here are some more wording remarks to the IRS 30100:
>
> p.30, last note:
> the part after the last comma seems superfluously
>
> ch 6.2.11, z2nd par:
> the description about the relation between
> PositioningNetElement und AssociatedPositioningElement is
> wrong.
> APS is contained by PNE!
>
> ch 6.3.6:
> defines the generic concept of a coordinate in a POSITIONING
> (not referencing) system
>
> ch 6.3.7, 2nd sentence:
> Should be two sentences
> 1. value range of attribute intrinsicCoord 0..1
> 2. Arbitrary amount of associated
> PositioningSystemCoordinate instances
>
> ch 6.4.5:
> in reference to one OR MORE PositioningNetElement
> according to Figure 72 only ONE!
>
> ch 6.4.5:
> Attribute applicationDirection: direction of the
> LINEARLOCATION?
> better: LinearElement?
>
> ch 6.4.9:
> between a LinearLocation and PositioningSystemCoordinate
> INSTANCES (is missing)
>
> Kind regards
> Felix
> SIGNON Deutschland GmbH
>


--
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
Re: Wordng remark to irs 30100 [message #1416 is a reply to message #1387] Wed, 07 September 2016 15:50 Go to previous message
Airy Magnien is currently offline  Airy Magnien
Messages: 2
Registered: September 2016
Junior Member
Taken into account in text revision, 20160907
Previous Topic: Attribute applicationDirection of LinearLocation
Next Topic: Redundant attribute description table
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Aug 16 21:35:05 CEST 2017