| Re: [railML2] trackRef@sequence [message #2169 is a reply to message #2162] |
Tue, 09 April 2019 22:09  |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 436
Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Torben,
Am 27.03.2019 um 13:30 schrieb Torben Brand:
> [...]
>
> Thank you again for your valuable critical thinking.
> Your approach is much closer to reality. In fact this is the track number
> rule in norway for single track lines.
>
> But your suggestion would require that the new attribute
> crossSection@ocpCenterSide is set. This is not always the case.
Why not thinking it the other way around: you can derive the value of
<crossSection>@ocpCenterSide from the sequence numbers of all the tracks?
> For your suggestion with starting the sequence at the ocp (or main track
> for that manner) and with tracks on both sides of the operational center of
> the ocp we would need negative numbers for the other side of the reference.
> Unfortunately the attribute is of type xs:positiveInteger.
The type of the attribute <ocp><propEquipment><trackRef>@sequence could
be changed from xs:positiveInteger into xs:integer without loosing
backwards compatibility. Therefore, if there is a need for it, railML
2.5 could have this change included.
We alternative
> could group the sequence to their relative position to the reference (ocp
> or main reference track). For instance:
> - 0-99 left of the reference on line with the operational center of the ocp
> or crossSection of the reference main track
> - 100-199 right of the reference on line with the operational center of the
> ocp or crossSection of the reference main track
> - 200-299 left of the reference in front of operational center of the ocp
> or crossSection of the reference main track
> - 300-399 right of the reference in front of operational center of the ocp
> or crossSection of the reference main track
> - 400-499 right of the reference behind operational center of the ocp or
> crossSection of the reference main track
> - 500-599 right of the reference behind operational center of the ocp or
> crossSection of the reference main track
>
> With this we also could map shunting tracks the are in the ocp and in the
> same relative position as the secondary tracks but but with a higher
> kilometration.
This approach seems to be a more complex one...
However, what does the rest of the community think about this proposal?
> As the ocp has no direction, how do you define the left/right side of the
> ocp? Here you need to either use track direction or maybe increasing
> mileage direction. I would prefer track direction.
And I would prefer the direction of increasing mileage :-)
Any other opinions from the community?
Best regards
Christian
--
Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Phone Coordinator: +49 173 2714509; railML.org: +49 351 47582911
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railml.org
Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
