| [railML3] Move category from timetable to common [message #3956] |
Tue, 07 April 2026 10:02  |
Milan Wölke
Messages: 223
Registered: April 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi all,
we are currently working on the SCOT (Service Concept for Tendering) use case. In this context, we have a new requirement: rolling stock vehicles should be able to reference categories from the timetable. The idea is to indicate which categories a vehicle can be used for. Our current approach is to introduce such references, i.e., a collection of references to collections.
Since the category is currently located in the timetable subschema, and we want to avoid introducing circular dependencies between subschemas, this would require moving the category to the common subschema.
Our first question is whether you see any issues with this approach.
If we proceed, we would also need a clear and descriptive name for the moved category, in particular as the meaning cannot be derived as easily from the context anymore after moving. At the moment, we are considering "trainCategory" or "serviceCategory." Do you have any suggestions?
Your feedback is appreciated.
Best regards,
Milan
Milan Hoffmann – Timetable schema coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [railML3] Move category from timetable to common [message #3977 is a reply to message #3956] |
Thu, 30 April 2026 12:48  |
Christian Rößiger
Messages: 81
Registered: March 2015
|
Member |
|
|
Hello all,
I have no objection to moving the categories from timetable to common. As categories are also used by IM, for example, to encode certain characteristics of a train, references from other areas than timetable or rollingStock to categories may be needed in the future. So it might be a good idea to move the categories to common.
However, I'm not sure whether letting vehicles reference categories directly is the right way to model this requirement: I rather understand the requirement as a set of rules defining which vehicles should or may be used for certain categories.
In my view, the rolling stock category tends to define the technical characteristics of the vehicles (weight, number of axles or seats, etc.), rather than their intended use in a specific context. In contrast, categories are not technical characteristics of a vehicle but are defined and assigned by the operator as part of the timetable planning process. Instead of having vehicles reference categories, I would therefore suggest explicitly modelling these relationships using a separate structure that references both vehicles and categories.
Example:
<vehicleCategoryRules>
<vehicleCategoryRule vehicleRef="veh_1">
<allowedCategory categoryRef="cat_Express" />
<allowedCategory categoryRef="cat_Regional" />
</vehicleCategoryRule>
<vehicleCategoryRule vehicleRef="veh_2">
<allowedCategory categoryRef="cat_Freight" />
</vehicleCategoryRule>
<vehicleCategoryRules>
This structure could exist within the timetable or as a separate top-level element.
Best regards
Christian
|
|
|
|
| Re: [railML3] Move category from timetable to common [message #3991 is a reply to message #3977] |
Wed, 06 May 2026 12:56 |
Milan Wölke
Messages: 223
Registered: April 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Christian,
thanks for your input. Just one question, why not simply add the vehicle references to the category? Shouldn't this provide the same information? What is the benefit you see from separating the mapping from the categories?
Thanks in advance.
Best regards, Milan
Milan Hoffmann – Timetable schema coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
