| Re: railML 3.x: Data Modelling Patterns [message #2069 is a reply to message #2064] |
Thu, 03 January 2019 18:50   |
Thomas Nygreen JBD
Messages: 68
Registered: February 2017
|
Member |
|
|
Joerg von Lingen wrote on Sat, 29 December 2018 05:08
Thomas,
is this a request to have any-elements extensions? If so where are they needed?
If I knew now, I would argue for including the elements in the IL subschema, rather than having to use extensions. It is in the nature of future use cases and user needs that we do not foresee them. Of course, there can also be elements that should not be included in railML, but are useful or necessary in a context-specific extension; I do not know if such examples exist already. Requests will probably come when the new version is put into use. In railML 2.x there was initially few extension points, but in the end they were introduced almost everywhere.
Currently, the IS subschema has any-elements built into all entities, while IL does not allow it at all, but it does allow any-attributes. I find that odd and inconsistent. I suggest to apply the same strategy as in IS in all subschemas.
Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen
Railway capacity engineer
Jernbanedirektoratet
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
