Home » railML newsgroups » railml.timetable » RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss [message #885 is a reply to message #879] |
Mon, 12 November 2012 23:04 |
Susanne Wunsch railML
Messages: 0 Registered: January 2020
|
|
|
|
Dear Dirk,
Dirk Bräuer <dirkbraeuer(at)irfpde> writes:
>> Do you mean "Lok umsetzen" with "formation reverse"?
>
> Of course not. Running ‘round with the engine does not reverse the
> formation, it changes the formation.
>
> ---
> Concerning the meaning of <ocpTT>.trainReverse:
> ---
[...]
Clarified. Thank you.
> ---
> Concerning the meaning of <formationTT>.orientationReversed:
> ---
[...]
Clarified. Thank you.
> ---
>> I'm sorry, I don't see the difference between a train and a
>> formation reverse.
[...]
Thanks for this clarification, too.
> (This refers to the current situation in RailML. It changes if we
> declare <ocpTT>.trainReverse obsolete and declare
> <formationTT>.orientationReversed to be used by definition as
> recommended in the previous post.)
I'm sorry this idea is based on my misunderstanding of the current
situation. So what would be the pros and cons of changing the current
situation?
PROs:
* Unambiguous connection definitions
* "Redundancy reduction": only one place in the schema where to define
reversing of train parts and/or whole trains
CONs:
* Changing current implementations with no strong need
> Hope I was able to clarify the difference between trainReverse and
> orientationReversed.
I think you got it!
Thanks a lot.
Kind regards...
Susanne
--
Susanne Wunsch
Schema Coordinator: railML.common
|
|
|
|
|
RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
|
|
Re: RFE for connection, DE:Anschluss
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Sep 08 03:26:54 CEST 2024
|