Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » Haltetafel / stop post
| Re: Stop posts for different train types (was: Haltetafel / stop post) [message #520 is a reply to message #518] |
Tue, 12 March 2013 20:05   |
Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Susanne,
I do not think that it is good to link infrastructure elements with
timetable categories. The categories have the character of “flexible,
quickly changing, depending on operators, sometimes a matter of marketing
and corporate identity, not very technical”.
The infrastructure, in contrary, should be rather “neutral”, independent
from operators. If there is a need for an infrastructure element to
express any restriction, it should name the actual physical source.
So it is ok to make attributes like “passenger-carrying” or
“non-passenger-carrying” or such, but it should be independent from
whether they name their trains “ICE” or “RB” or whatever. Please remember
that an IM (EIU) has to be prepared to accept any new TOC (EVU) not
knowing how they categorise their trains.
Or the other way ‘round: Imagine you are a TOC preparing a bid for an
competition. You have the RailML infrastructure file of the IM but you can
only see stop posts for “ICE” and “IC”. You do not know which one to take
because you do not see the physical background. So what to do? You could
ask the IM but this is not in the sense of RailML files (asking per
telephone). And, possibly you do not want to ask because some hours later,
everybody would know that you are bidding at this competition (via
Drehscheibe Online)…
It is the same reason why I pleaded for deleting of the categoryRefs from
<speedChanges>: Infrastructure has to be independent from operators.
Concerning the usage so far existing, it is common not to tread a train
consisting of coaching stock but non-passenger-carrying (empty coaching
stock) as a “passengerTrain”. Or, with other words: A “passengerTrain“ in
the technological sense is only a “passengerTrain“ if it is allowed for
passengers to use it…
So I do not see any need for a categoryRef.
If you want to extend something: At infrastructure please always try to
describe the physical background / reason.
Best regards,
Dirk.
|
|
|
|
Current Time: Wed May 08 09:36:41 CEST 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
