| Re: [railML3] Mandatory <length> element for <track>s [message #2231 is a reply to message #2224] |
Mon, 26 August 2019 12:49   |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 436
Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Christian,
Am 18.07.2019 um 16:15 schrieb Christian Rößiger:
> [...]
> From my point of view the specification of a <length> for a <track>
> element should be completely optional in the next version of the railML
> schema. If necessary, the specification of a specific length definition
> depending on the usecase can be forced by semantic constraints. What do
> you think about this?
thank you very much for sharing your idea about making the track length
optional with the community.
Indeed, the question is essential. When making <track><length> mandatory
we followed discussion about the problem of locating elements
(NetEntities) in the topology network without intrinsic coordinates, but
with "positions". Without the information about the track's length, it
is impossible to derive an intrinsic location of the element, which is
being calculated as position/length and thus covers a range {0..1}. So,
in order to make intrinsic coordinates optional, we decided to make
<length> mandatory.
How to continue in future?
If there is a strong demand by the community, we have to think about the
mandatory <length> once again. Everybody is invited to provide their
thoughts on the topic...
Thank you very much and 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
