Home » railML newsgroups » railml.misc » Consolidated Use Cases List (Should the UCs be presented in one consolidated list or per subschema)
Consolidated Use Cases List [message #1958] Mon, 10 September 2018 15:10 Go to next message
Ferri Leberl is currently offline  Ferri Leberl
Messages: 17
Registered: September 2016
Junior Member
Dear All,

There has been a discussion whether to consolidate the UC lists or whether to stick to the current solution with separate UC lists per subschema.
As a demonstration, I have made up a consolidated list which can be found under
https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=UC:Use_cases/table
Currently, both this list and the lists by subschema are linked under
https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=UC:Use_cases#Lists_o f_Use_Cases_per_subschema

The coordinator would prefer to go on with the consolidated list as it is more efficient to maintain and offers a broader view. However, the consolidated list is more difficult to overlook.
We want to avoid offering both the consolidated list and the existing ones for maintenance reasons.

Can we declare it a consent to skip the old lists and keep the consolidated one?

Thank you for your responses.
Ferri Leberl
Re: Consolidated Use Cases List [message #1966 is a reply to message #1958] Sun, 16 September 2018 14:37 Go to previous message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 83
Registered: May 2011
Member
Thanks for collecting the data to one table.
1) One overview would be useful as most UC will be not limited to one subschema,
e.g. IL will always need basic IS description.
2) The new table shows a problem of (duplicate) changes at different places. The
list of IL-UC in this table does not match the IL-specific list.
3) I would prefer the consolidated list as the only one. "Filtering" can be done
by the sorting of columns.

Best regards,
Joerg v. Lingen

Interlocking/Rollingstock Coordinator

On 10/09/2018 15:10, Ferri Leberl wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> There has been a discussion whether to consolidate the UC
> lists or whether to stick to the current solution with
> separate UC lists per subschema.
> As a demonstration, I have made up a consolidated list which
> can be found under
> https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=UC:Use_cases/table
> Currently, both this list and the lists by subschema are
> linked under
> https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=UC:Use_cases#Lists_o f_Use_Cases_per_subschema
>
>
> The coordinator would prefer to go on with the consolidated
> list as it is more efficient to maintain and offers a
> broader view. However, the consolidated list is more
> difficult to overlook.
> We want to avoid offering both the consolidated list and the
> existing ones for maintenance reasons.
>
> Can we declare it a consent to skip the old lists and keep
> the consolidated one?
>
> Thank you for your responses.
> Ferri Leberl
Previous Topic: railML 3.x: Data Modelling Patterns
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Sep 20 23:51:30 CEST 2018