Dear Andreas and other railML users,
>> the trainProtection element offers a somewhat rough classification of
>> train protection equipment for tracks. On the other hand, in the
>> timetabling scheme we have the <equipmentUsage> of a trainPart where a
>> predefined list is offered. I think this should be harmonized.
>
> You are right, the trainProtection element within the infrastructure
> scheme is still quite abstract and needs revision. Your idea is to add
> the enumeration attribute
>
> tNationalSystemsType
> (ALSEN, ALSN, ASFA, ATB, ATBEG, ATBEN, ATC, ATSP, ATSS, AWS, BACC,
> CIR-ELKE, CIR-ELKE2, Crocodile, CSS, DATC, EBICAB, EVM120, EVM160,
> Fahrsp, GWATP, Indusi54, Indusi60, Indusi60R, Integra-Signum, KHP,
> KLUBU, KVB, LS, LS90, LZB, Memor, Memor2, Mirel, PZ80, PZB90, RS4c,
> SAUTC, SAUTCM, SAUTU, SCMT, SELCAB, SHP, SSC, TBL, TPWS, TVM300, TVM430,
> ZSI127, ZSI90, ZSL90, ZST90, ZUB121, ZUB122, ZUB123, ZUB262)
>
> that is being used within the timetable schema in the
> trainProtectionElement object? Thus, the string attributes "system" and
> "model" may become redundant.
for the implementation of this open task I created a new trac ticket
with the following content [1]:
For railML 2.2 the infrastructure element trainProtectionElement should
be enhanced with a new parameter "trainProtectionSystem" with the values
of type tNationalSystemsType. The string parameter "system" is then no
longer needed and should be marked as DEPRECATED.
[1] https://trac.assembla.com/railML/ticket/175
Regards
--
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
