Home » railML newsgroups » railml.misc » [railML2] extend the elements under <organisationalUnits> with the <designator> element (organisationalUnits)
[railML2] extend the elements under <organisationalUnits> with the <designator> element [message #2476] Tue, 30 June 2020 13:22 Go to next message
Torben Brand is currently offline  Torben Brand
Messages: 92
Registered: March 2016
Member
Jernbanedirektoratet suggests to extend the elements under <organisationalUnits> ( https://wiki2.railml.org/index.php?title=CO:organizationalUn its) with the <designator> element in version 2.5.

The reason is many different code lists exists. These overlap and are not consistent. We need to be able to reference to the register used for the entry value.

Note the same organisation can have different entrys in different registers depending on their type of role. For instance an IM can be both an: infrastrucutre nmanager, railway undertaking and vehicle owner.

Examples of registers are:
railML codelist for IM
UIC RICS (https://uic.org/support-activities/it/rics)
ERA OCR (https://www.era.europa.eu/registers/ocr_en)
ERA TAF/TAP Company code (https://teleref.era.europa.eu/)
Vehicle keeper Marking Register (VKM) (https://www.era.europa.eu/registers/vkm_en)
National registers (https://sjt.no/jernbane/tillatelser/jernbanevirksomheter/)
Organisational registers

This with reference to topic "Suggested refined definitions and extension to organizationalUnits ( https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=706& amp ;goto=2325&#msg_2325)

This is already implemented in railML3.


[Updated on: Tue, 30 June 2020 13:26]

Report message to a moderator

Re: [railML2] extend the elements under <organisationalUnits> with the <designator> element [message #2485 is a reply to message #2476] Fri, 03 July 2020 14:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 275
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Torben, dear all,

sounds like a good idea to me.
I am wondering if we need to keep the codelist InfrastructureManagers.xml or if we can get rid of it?
Any comments appreciated...

Best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML2] extend the elements under <organisationalUnits> with the <designator> element [message #2515 is a reply to message #2485] Wed, 19 August 2020 17:28 Go to previous message
Thomas Nygreen is currently offline  Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 30
Registered: March 2008
Member
Dear Torben,

The coordinators discussed this topic in our telco on 26 June and I was
given the task to create a Trac ticket and present it in the forum. You
can find the Track ticket at [1], but then I left for the summer and the
forum post was postponed. So I thank you for saving me the work :)

One correction, though: this issue also applies to railML 3, as
<designator> was not applied to organisational units in railML 3.1.

As Christian writes, we also need feedback from the community on whether
we should:

a) Keep the InfrastructureManagers.xml code list as an authoritative
reference for @code in <infrastructureManager> (in addition to <designator>)

b) Stop using the code list for future versions and recommend using
<designator> instead. @code will still exist in 2.5, but will function
like it does on other elements, and no longer be a universal reference.

I prefer b. It saves maintenance, is more consistent with how @code is
used elsewhere, and gives consistency between different types of
organisational units.

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/383

Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen - Common schema coordinator, railML.org


Thomas Nygreen - Common Schema Coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Previous Topic: [railML3] Additional Attributes for Revision Management
Next Topic: [railML3] Handling changes between minor versions
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Sep 25 13:13:37 CEST 2020