Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » railML 2.3 infrastructure extension proposal signal types and functions (railML 2.3 infrastructure extension proposal signal types and functions)
[railML 2.4] level crossing railway signals [message #1916 is a reply to message #1515] Mon, 20 August 2018 17:37 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 436
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Torben,

in your list of signal types, let's have a closer look at the level
crossing related signals...

Am 24.02.2017 um 16:16 schrieb Torben Brand:
> [...]I suggest, based on the feedback, to change my suggested
> extension for signal to:
> <signal>@type"other:danger"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-30
> <signal>@type"other:derailer"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-27
> <signal>@type"other:switch"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-25
> <signal>@type"other:crossingMain"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-28
> <signal>@type"other:crossingDistant"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-29
> <signal>@type"other:crossingRoad"
> https://trv.jbv.no/wiki/Signal/Prosjektering/Veisikringsanle gg#Signal_mot_vei_3
>
> <signal>@type"other:shuntingArea"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-22
> <signal>@type"other:slowSpeed"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-19
> <signal>@type"other:clearedFouling"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-19
> <signal>@type"other:line"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-20
> <signal>@type"other:deflectingSpeed"
> https://lovdata.no/forskrift/2008-02-29-240/9-24

The railML schema already provides a dedicated level crossing signal
with different types (see [1]). Instead of "crossingDistant", railML
models a <signal><levelCrossing>@type="activating". The "crossingMain"
is missing in railML. Based on the signal's functionality I suggest to
name it <signal><levelCrossing>@type="supervision".

On the other side, level crossing road signals open a wide field of
examples and implementations. For short-term release of railML 2.4, a
well-formed solution will not be available. In general, I would like to
see these signals somehow implemented under the umbrella term level
crossing protection - definitely a task for railML 3...

I created a Trac ticket [2]. Please feel free to provide your opinion on
this topic.

[1] https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=IS:levelCrossing_sig nal
[2] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/338#ticket

Thank you and regards
Christian

--
Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Phone Coordinator: +49 173 2714509; railML.org: +49 351 47582911
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railml.org

Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: railML 3.x - NTSM use case organisational/contact data
Next Topic: railML 2.3 infrastructure extension proposal - locks
Goto Forum:
  

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

Current Time: Sun May 05 01:51:10 CEST 2024