| Re: Extension for (track)side of referenced ocp [message #1883 is a reply to message #1881] |
Tue, 24 July 2018 12:33   |
Tobias Bregulla
Messages: 20
Registered: June 2017
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear Torben,
thank you very much for this interesting idea!
Am 14.07.2018 um 17:45 schrieb Torben Brand:
> We see a need to map the ocp in relation to the track (s).
> Today the ocp is linked to the crosssection so it knows on
> which pos/abspos it is placed. But it does not know on which
> side of the track/crossSection it is placed.
For Bahnkonzept we would welcome such an extension of the railML
standard from V2.4, since we also record these values in our databases
and thus could also output them in conformity with standards.
However, from a practical point of view there are still some questions
that should be carefully documented in the wiki to ensure uniform
application.
> Thus, we
> suggest an optional attribute with the enumeration values
> "left" or "right" (as seen in track direction)
> This for the following use case: Network statement and
> schematic track plan and nice to have for capacity
> planning.
Of course, further values would have to be included in the list in order
to be able to depict the usual positional relationships:
- left: station/interlocking building on the left side of the track
- right: station/interlocking building on the left side of the track
- both: station/interlocking building on both sides of the track
- above: station/interlocking building above the tracks
(Example: Berlin-Gesundbrunnen)
- below: station/interlocking building under the tracks
- front: station/interlocking building before the end of the tracks
(Example: dead end stations like Leipzig main station as well as
all major Parisian and London long-distance stations)
- none: operating stations without station/interlocking buildings
such as stopping points or modern German stations (e.g. Allersberg; see
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Train_st ation_NALB_Allersberg_DE_2007-02-16.jpg)
- unknown: Location of the reception building/interlocking is not known
> I know this posting will raise a lot of questions of what
> constitutes and ocp. So I keep it somewhat open with using
> "Rep" in nor:OcpRepSide. "Rep" can stand for
> "representative", meaning the dispatcher (the dot in the
> simple example drawing) . It can also stand for
> "representation" as some tools use building icons to place
> the ocp as an object in the tool. This does not mean that
> there is a real building there. Thus, the use of
> "representation".
The wiki should describe as clearly as possible when a station building
and a interlocking building or signal box are to be indicated
(sequence?). It should also be noted that:
- the location of the station building does not give any information
about platforms and their location,
- The location of the (same) building must be consistent for different
legs of a station,
- (other conditions?).
I would definitely suggest to add the possibility of naming the station
building (including language name), as this is often shown in schematic
plans and can give hints for the user.
The naming shall be discussed as I know the term "station building"
rather than "representation building"; but this shall be
discussed/decided by native speakers.
What does the community think about it?
Best regards,
Tobias and the Bahnkonzept team
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
