Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » [railML3] Identifiers in Infrastructure
[railML3] Identifiers in Infrastructure [message #2909] Mon, 14 February 2022 16:48 Go to next message
Milan Wölke is currently offline  Milan Wölke
Messages: 139
Registered: April 2007
Senior Member
Hallo zusammen,

mir ist aufgefallen, dass in der Infrastruktur im neuen railML 3 alle Elemente eine ID benötigen. Das an sich hat mich nicht gewundert, was mich aber überrascht hat, ist die Tatsache, dass auf viele dieser Elemente gar nicht verwiesen werden kann. Es ist also nicht so, dass in einigen Files von einem Verweis kein Gebrauch gemacht wird, sondern eher so, dass es gar nicht möglich ist einen solchen Verweis zu kodieren. Beispielsweise muss ich für jedes associatedPositioningSystem Element eine ID definieren, obwohl der Zweck des Elements nur darin besteht auf eine andere ID, nämlich die des eigentlichen Positioning Systems zu verweisen. Auch für jede Koordinate muss eine ID vergeben werden, auf die dann aber nie verwiesen wird.
Finde ich persönlich sehr unschön und würde daher gern vorschlagen diesen Umstand zu beseitigen und nur noch da IDs zu verwenden und zu erzwingen, auf die auch verwiesen werden kann.
Wie sehen das die Benutzer? Wie seht ihr das?

-------------------------

I noticed that all elements in the infrastructure in the new railML 3 require an ID. That in itself did not surprise me, but what did surprise me was the fact that many of these elements cannot be referenced at all. So it is not that in some files a reference is not used, but rather that it is not possible to code such a reference. For example, I have to define an ID for each associatedPositioningSystem element, although the purpose of the element is only to refer to yet another ID, namely that of the actual positioning system. An ID must also be assigned for each coordinate, which is then never referenced.
I personally find this very unattractive and would therefore like to suggest eliminating this aspect and only using and enforcing IDs that can also be referenced.
How do the users see this? How do you see it?

Best regards, Milan


Milan Wölke – Timetable scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML3] Identifiers in Infrastructure [message #2910 is a reply to message #2909] Fri, 18 February 2022 10:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Hallo Milan,

ich stimme Dir voll und ganz zu: Ich hatte auch schon mal vor längerer Zeit angeregt (und m. E. auch im Misc-Forum geschrieben), dass es "Ids" nur dann geben sollte, wenn irgendwo im Schema auch eine "Ref" darauf verweist.

Viele Grüße,
Dirk.
Re: [railML3] Identifiers in Infrastructure [message #2965 is a reply to message #2910] Fri, 18 March 2022 11:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 436
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Milan and Dirk,

I think that this topic is too big to discuss it at the edge of railML 3.2 release. Therefore, I suggest to continue the forum discussion, but leave the UML model as it is. Please let me know if you disagree with this proposal.

In any case, it would be great to gather more community feedback on this topic.

Best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML3] Identifiers in Infrastructure [message #2971 is a reply to message #2965] Mon, 21 March 2022 13:53 Go to previous message
Milan Wölke is currently offline  Milan Wölke
Messages: 139
Registered: April 2007
Senior Member
Hi Christian,

I agree that its a bit late before the 3.2 to still make this kind of change, regrettable as it is. Especially as this change will need 2 minor versions before taking effect, one for the deprecation notice and one for actually doing it, that is if we at all decide to follow the proposal. So we should schedule this change for 3.3 and finish it in 3.4.

Best regards, Milan


Milan Wölke – Timetable scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Previous Topic: [railML3] missing @ruleCode?
Next Topic: serviceSections extension
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Mar 29 08:49:09 CET 2024