| Re: SpeedChange : Protection system reference [message #403 is a reply to message #342] |
Wed, 24 October 2012 16:41   |
Susanne Wunsch railML
Messages: 0
Registered: January 2020
|
|
|
|
Dear Dirk, Christian, Pierre and others
Dirk Bräuer <dirkbraeuer(at)irfpde> writes:
As Dirk Bräuer wrote:
> In my opinion, the speed change sign and the <trainProtectionElement>
> have independent functions.
No, they have a strong dependence. I think of the German "GPA".
> (Of course they have the same origin or reason why they are there but:
> If there would be a speed change without <trainProtectionElement> or
> vice versa, each one would have to function alone.)
Yes, they do function alone. But if you remove the speed panel, you have
to remove or modify the magnets, too.
> Both should be implemented as single elements may be with the same
> position (meter).
Sure, they are already implemented this way.
> A reading software can possibly expect that there should be a
> <trainProtectionElement> at or near the position of a <speedChange>
> but there is no _general_ (internationally accepted) necessity for
> that.
I don't want the reading software to guess the above mentioned
dependence between the <speedChange> and the <trainProtectionElement>.
It may guess wrong! Maybe a train protection element is there for
another reason than the speed aspect, e.g. a signal in the other
direction.
Speed changes without such a link are surely the most common case and
will stay like they are now.
Besides this, it could be, that there are other facilities to ensure the
speed restriction than the above mentioned train protection elements,
e.g. highly equipped video cameras or laser devices with other
background systems? I don't know. We should leave an xs:any element
there. ;-)
Kind regards...
Susanne
--
Susanne Wunsch
Schema Coordinator: railML.common
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
