| Re: new draft V1.1-R1 [message #682 is a reply to message #681] |
Mon, 08 September 2008 10:26  |
Daniel Huerlimann
Messages: 17
Registered: September 2004
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hello Joachim
I looked at your proposals and I have the following comment:
The term "route" is used in railway interlocking. I do not recommend to
use it in the timetable schema to avoid naming conflicts.
I recommend to rename "routeOcps" and "routeSections".
A glossary of railway terms related to signaling and control:
http://joernpachl.gmxhome.de/glossary.htm
Best regards
Dani
> Hello,
>
> there are some new developments around the timetable schema. As Susanne
> showed in the last meetings, there are still unsolved issues around
> "operational trains" versus "commercial trains" and "splitting / joining".
> So I started a greater restructuring of the timetable schema. A first
> draft (Version 1.1-R1) could be seen on the developer side. There is also
> a handmade example included in order to get an impression.
>
> Main changes are:
> - "trains" as basic train parts with fix "formation" and "operatingPeriod"
> - "trainGroups" for commercial/operational trains
> - "routeOcps" instead of "timetableentries" and "entry" elements
> - "routeSections" instead of "section" elements
> - several discarded elements and attributes ("operation", "section",
> "intervalTrainID", ...)
> - several renamings in "id" and "RefId" to use the common
> "tElementWithIDAndName", ...)
> - some grouping of the attributes ("trainKind", "arrivalDepartureTimes",
> ..)
> - new attributes "emptyRunning" and "shuntingTime" for rollingstock
> circulation purposes
>
> Please have a look at all these changes and let's start a discussion about
> them. Or at least give me some feedback.
>
> Kind regards,
> Joachim
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
