Forum: railml.interlocking » What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s?

Home » railML newsgroups » railml.interlocking » What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s?

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? [message #2070 is a reply to message #2066]

Thu, 03 January 2019 19:41

Thomas Nygreen JBD
Messages: 68
Registered: February 2017

Member

Hi Jörg,

Would this not be the same for all subschemas? At least, both infrastructure and timetables have phases during their planning. Yet, the infrastructure subschema does not have such a grouping of entities. Instead, all functional infrastructure entities are in one view, only grouped into containers by type. I would welcome a coordination of the strategies in the different schemas.

Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen
Railway capacity engineer
Jernbanedirektoratet

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? By: Thomas Nygreen JBD on Fri, 28 December 2018 23:00
		Re: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? By: Joerg von Lingen on Sun, 30 December 2018 05:26
		Re: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? By: Thomas Nygreen JBD on Thu, 03 January 2019 19:41
		Re: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? By: Joerg von Lingen on Wed, 13 January 2021 05:41

Previous Topic:	[railML3] Flank protection
Next Topic:	Restricted Areas: limitedBy vs. elements inside

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sun May 12 05:20:34 CEST 2024