Home » railML newsgroups » railml.interlocking » Partial Route (Route release group)
Partial Route [message #1616] Fri, 23 June 2017 16:24 Go to next message
Bob Janssen is currently offline  Bob Janssen
Messages: 6
Registered: March 2016
Junior Member
The set of an TVD sections that constitute a partial route should become an independent object for use by one or more route release objects.
Partial routes are used for for transit souple in France and Teilfahrstraßenauflösung in Germany.
Partial Routes can be used, i.e. shared, by more than one route in terms of data modelling.

As such, Partial Routes can be regarded as immaterial assets.
Re: Partial Route [message #2006 is a reply to message #1616] Mon, 05 November 2018 17:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fabiana Diotallevi is currently offline  Fabiana Diotallevi
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2018
Junior Member
Hi,
I would like to bring this topic up because I have some questions about the partial routes.
As far I understood, if the interlocking releases each individual tvd section after use, the release group of the knowsRoute can be omitted.
However, in this case, there would be no information about the tvd sections that compose the route.
On the other hand, one could avoid this by defining a partial route for each tvd Section (as done in the simpleExample), but in this way the information would be redundant.

I was wondering whether it makes sense to reference direclty the tvD sections that compose the route as an alternative to the partial routes.

What do you think about that?

Regards,

Fabiana
Re: Partial Route [message #2007 is a reply to message #2006] Wed, 07 November 2018 05:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 88
Registered: May 2011
Member
Dear Fabiana,

the path of a route is defined by start and end plus the position of facing points. This equals the concept of
geographic interlocking. The TVD sections composing the route shall be derived from the topology.
There was also the idea of having an element ControlTable in interlocking to gather the information in tabular style.
However, this was deemed not really necessary and being a redundancy to the existing way to define routes. Thus it was
not yet further developed in the schema.

Best Jörg.
Interlocking coordinator

Fabiana Diotallevi wrote on 05.11.2018 17:08:
> Hi,
> I would like to bring this topic up because I have some
> questions about the partial routes.
> As far I understood, if the interlocking releases each
> individual tvd section after use, the release group of the
> knowsRoute can be omitted.
> However, in this case, there would be no information about
> the tvd sections that compose the route.
> On the other hand, one could avoid this by defining a
> partial route for each tvd Section (as done in the
> simpleExample), but in this way the information would be
> redundant.
>
> I was wondering whether it makes sense to reference direclty
> the tvD sections that compose the route as an alternative to
> the partial routes.
>
> What do you think about that?
>
> Regards,
>
> Fabiana
>
Re: Partial Route [message #2008 is a reply to message #2007] Wed, 07 November 2018 10:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fabiana Diotallevi is currently offline  Fabiana Diotallevi
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2018
Junior Member
Dear Joerg,
thanks for your reply, I understood your point.
It just seems to me that in some cases (when the interlocking releases each individual tvd section after use) the definition of partial routes coincides with the definition of tvd sections and gives no further information.
Anyway you are right, defining the start and the end elements plus the position of facing points is enough to define a route.


Best regards,

Fabiana
Re: Partial Route [message #2013 is a reply to message #2007] Sat, 17 November 2018 06:23 Go to previous message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 88
Registered: May 2011
Member
Hi,

in comparison to railML2.3nor the list of TVD sections in the route path seems
to be considered in addition to the path definition by point positions. They
intend to use a similar model with releaseGroups.

Thus the question arise whether to mandatorily have the partialRoutes as
realeaseGroups in each route although each single section is released on its own.

Best regards,
Joerg v. Lingen

Interlocking Coordinator

On 07.11.2018 05:17, Joerg von Lingen wrote:
> Dear Fabiana,
>
> the path of a route is defined by start and end plus the position of facing points. This equals the concept of
> geographic interlocking. The TVD sections composing the route shall be derived from the topology.
> There was also the idea of having an element ControlTable in interlocking to gather the information in tabular style.
> However, this was deemed not really necessary and being a redundancy to the existing way to define routes. Thus it was
> not yet further developed in the schema.
>
> Best Jörg.
> Interlocking coordinator
>
> Fabiana Diotallevi wrote on 05.11.2018 17:08:
>> Hi,
>> I would like to bring this topic up because I have some
>> questions about the partial routes.
>> As far I understood, if the interlocking releases each
>> individual tvd section after use, the release group of the
>> knowsRoute can be omitted.
>> However, in this case, there would be no information about
>> the tvd sections that compose the route.
>> On the other hand, one could avoid this by defining a
>> partial route for each tvd Section (as done in the
>> simpleExample), but in this way the information would be
>> redundant.
>>
>> I was wondering whether it makes sense to reference direclty
>> the tvD sections that compose the route as an alternative to
>> the partial routes.
>>
>> What do you think about that?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Fabiana
>>
Previous Topic: Overlapping or gapping track section borders
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Nov 17 16:12:35 CET 2018