Home » railML newsgroups » railml.infrastructure » [railML 2.5] state (Shall the state "unknown" be explicitly defined?)
[railML 2.5] state [message #2549] Fri, 09 October 2020 15:40 Go to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 277
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear all,

the element <state> is used in combination with several infrastructure elements in order to define these elements being in a certain state, e.g. "operational" or "disabled".

For defining an unknown state, we have two options:
* option 1: define a missing element <state> as being an unknown state
* option 2: add new explicit value "unknown" to the state enumeration

Which option do you prefer?

For more details, please check Trac ticket #421 [1]

Thank you very much and best regards
Christian

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/421


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML 2.5] state [message #2551 is a reply to message #2549] Fri, 09 October 2020 15:58 Go to previous message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 295
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Hi Christian,

option 2, please.

Option 1 would mean that you change the default value (meaning) of <state>. So far, there was no "unknown" documented. So, we export infrastructure without <state> when we mean "operational" - we simply do not repeat the "operational" at all possible occurrences. Rather, we switch them off (with "disabled") in the (rare) case we haven an element which cannot be used. If you now define the default value as "unknown", all our existing railML files would immediately change their meaning from "operational" to "unknown".

I also want to remind here that "operational" or "unknown" cannot mean the actual state of the element; rather, they must be understood in the context of the certain railML file where they occur. Therefore, "operational" means: Used in the context in this railML file, or assumed to be operational here. No guarantee, no deduction allowed outside the railML file. It can be an element which is not even built jet, a proposed station for instance.

So to encode an element which is "unknown" is an even more rare and a bit strange case from our view. Of course all elements which are _not_ included in the railML file at all can be obviously unknown to the creator of that file.

With best regards,
Dirk.
Previous Topic: [railML3] speed at level crossing
Next Topic: [railML3]: keyLocksIL and ownsLogicalDevice
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Oct 29 03:39:40 CET 2020