| Re: How to represent open circulations in railML? [message #1723 is a reply to message #1712] |
Tue, 13 March 2018 10:36  |
Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Andreas,
I "internally" agree with all you have written. Means: I see no discrepancy in understanding.
I am not sure whether the writing is clear enough (and not missleading) for anybody who is new in railML circulation.
a) I would consider linking the "missing" /nextBlockRef/ attribute to the concept of "open" circulation plans, as the contrary of "closed" circulation plans which never have missing /nextBlockRef/s.
b) I think the sentence
"The presence of a circulation element that references this block via blockRef, in this case, merily expresses that fact that the block is considered as belonging to the roster."
is a bit of an "understatement" because such a <circulation> element does not only express that the block belongs to the roster. It can also express at which day it is formed by which (nominal) vehicle - by its attributes /operatingPeriodRef/ and /vehicleCounter/.
Your write that such a circulation models a block that has no pre-/successor in the _linked_ chain (of this roster). This is formally true. But, in reality, it has of course a pre- and a successor, in the previous and following circulation plans. So actually the attribute /vehicleCounter/ is currently (with the current railML schemes) the only chance to find out _which_ vehicle exactly form this block (and unfortunately only an indirect kind). That's why I think such open <circulation> elements are still very important and not only "merely expressions".
I can write a suggestion for (a) later in case you do not want to do it now.
I want to ask you to extend or change your sentence for (b) if you agree with my argumentation.
With best regards,
Dirk.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
