| Re: Mapping of availability periods of the infrastructure by TT:operatingPeriod [message #1776 is a reply to message #1772] |
Sun, 29 April 2018 22:14   |
Christian Rößiger
Messages: 61
Registered: March 2015
|
Member |
|
|
Hello Christian,
I did not take part in the meeting in Berlin, but your example looks
understandable to me. However, I have 2 comments on using the
<operatingPeriod>:
- The attributes startDate and endDate only define the validity period
of the <operatingPeriod>, i.e. for which period the <operatingPeriod>
contains data. The actual days on which an activity takes place (in your
example the non-availability) must be defined using the bitMask attribut
and / or the <operatingDay> / <specialService> elements.
- According to railML-Wiki the attributes startDate / endDate are used
to limit the validity of a <operatingPeriod> compared to its
<timetablePeriod>, i.e. if startDate / endDate is used for a
<operatingPeriod>, a suitable <timetablePeriod> should also be given for
this <operatingPeriod>.
Best regards
Christian Rößiger
Am 23.04.2018 um 14:51 schrieb Christian Rahmig:
> Dear all,
>
> may I briefly summarize the solution that we agreed on in Berlin last
> week with a short example:
>
> <infrastructure ...>
> <track ...>
> <states>
> <state disabled="true" operatingPeriodRef="opp01"
> startTime="22:00:00" endTime="06:00:00" endDayOffset="1"/>
> </states>
> ...
> </track>
> </infrastructure>
>
> <timetable ...>
> <operatingPeriods>
> <operatingPeriod id="opp01" startDate="2018-04-28"
> endDate="2018-04-29"/>
> </operatingPeriods>
> </timetable>
>
> This example describes the (non-repeating) closing of the track from
> Saturday, 10 pm, to Sunday, 6 am.
>
> Any comments from your side?
>
> Best regards
> Christian
--
iRFP e. K. · Institut für Regional- und Fernverkehrsplanung
Hochschulstr. 45, 01069 Dresden
Tel. +49 351 4706819 · Fax. +49 351 4768190 · www.irfp.de
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Dresden, HRA 9347
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
