Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » SpeedChange : Protection system reference
Re: SpeedChange : Protection system reference [message #418 is a reply to message #416] Thu, 01 November 2012 16:40 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Dear all,

> Why not to define both references like already done with the
> <connection> elements? That can be easily assured by special
> constraints. Both sights meet their requirements.

I would agree with that suggestion - despite it is redundancy.

But if we create such a cross-reference here, we should also answer the
general question related with it:
- The redundancy which always lies in two cross-references has to be
accepted.
- Each reference in RailML which is so far a simple one - one direction
only - can be made to an optional cross-reference without discussion.

Is it possible to make cross-references optional in general? That means:
It is not necessary to give both directions. If both directions are given,
the special XML constrains secure that they there is no conflict between
them.

Best regards,
Dirk.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Alternative Stationsnamen (ocp, additionalName)
Next Topic: Tools zum Erstellen der Topologie / Tools for creating the topology
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri May 17 07:56:51 CEST 2024