| [railML3] Suggested change for railML 3.3 Timetable regarding times at passing points [message #3214] |
Thu, 21 March 2024 13:53  |
Milan Wölke
Messages: 139
Registered: April 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hello,
in our last timetable developer meeting we discussed about the pros and cons of TT:014 in railML 2. This semantic constraint specifies that when describing pass through point no arrival time shall be given ( https://wiki2.railml.org/wiki/TT:times_ocpTT_ocpsTT_trainPar t#Semantic_Constraints_/_Semantische_Beschr%C3%A4nkungen). During this discussion we also came across the fact that in the timetable model of railML 3 the same semantic constrain could make sense. However one of the goals when modelling railML 3 was to reduce the need for semantic constraints. It was therefore suggested to change the modelling in railML 3 to syntactically ensure that only one time was provided for a passthrough. That would mean that the times that in railML 3.2 are specified an the level of the baseItineraryPoint would be moved to the pass and stop element that are children of baseItineraryPoint. Like this under pass it would only be possible to specify the departure time while for stop it would remain to be possible to specify arrival and departure.
Please also take a look at the attached screenshot to get a better understanding of the intended change.
What does the community think about this change. Is there an argument that would go against this modification? One of the drawbacks would of course be that under the current rules for changing existing modelling the original location of times as direct child of baseItineraryPoint would become deprecated in railML 3.3 with the additional way of specifying times at the new locations.
Let me know what you think.
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] Suggested change for railML 3.3 Timetable regarding times at passing points [message #3235 is a reply to message #3214] |
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:24  |
Christian Rößiger
Messages: 61
Registered: March 2015
|
Member |
|
|
Hello Milan,
I think your suggestion is an improvement to the schema. As there are already different sub-elements for stops and pass throughs, we can also use these for a specialised representation of times. I'm still considering whether it would make sense to rename the element for passages from "departure" to "pass" (or similar), but that wouldn't make much difference.
I also share your concerns that we will temporarily have the old and the new solution in parallel in the schema due to the change rules between railML versions. But in my opinion, this is a general problem of the change rules, which we will have in future with all changes to existing attributes/elements. So I think that this issue should not play a role if we have to decide in favour of or against a specific change in the scheme.
Best Regards
Christian
--
iRFP e. K. · Institut für Regional- und Fernverkehrsplanung
Hochschulstr. 45, 01069 Dresden
Tel. +49 351 4706819 · Fax. +49 351 4768190 · www.irfp.de
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Dresden, HRA 9347
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
