Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » small issues on "register" and "tLineInfrastructureManagerCode"
Re: small issues on "register" and "tLineInfrastructureManagerCode" [message #449 is a reply to message #447] Mon, 12 November 2012 15:22 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 313
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
I would prefer it the other way 'round:

There are many infrastructure companies, it can become easily more or less
and they can change their names as their shirts: So I would prefer a
string here. I see no reason why a software would have to "understand"
that value - it is just a note for the user. (If there would be any
function behind the IM, it would be a matter for <operationModeChange> or
something like that.)

On the contrary, <designator>.register is something very important for a
software (may be a primary key). There are much less "registers" than IMs,
they are of much more "internal" nature and therefore do not change their
names so quickly, and with further computerisation we can expect less
"registers" in future. So I think an enumeration for "register" would be
very helpful when exchanging data between softwares.

Dirk.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: <crossSection>.ocpTrackID
Next Topic: request for an attribute for the Infrastructure Manager of a line
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Mon Sep 16 15:35:21 CEST 2024