Home » railML newsgroups » railml.timetable » Attribute processStatus to be declared deprecated for <train>, <trainPart> and <trainGroup>
Re: Attribute processStatus to be declared deprecated for <train>, <trainPart> and <trainGroup> [message #2323 is a reply to message #2242] Thu, 06 February 2020 15:08 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Torben Brand is currently offline  Torben Brand
Messages: 158
Registered: March 2016
Senior Member
The Norwegian railML community uses @proccessStatus in it's data exchange via railML. We even plan to extend the use with other:*. We suggest to adopt these other: values in railML2.5/3 or to adopt them in the mentioned (but unpublished) new solution in the initial forum posting.
The background UC for the use of @proccessStatus is:
• UC:TT:LongTermStrategicTimetabling
• UC:TT:ATimetableForACompetition
• UC:TT:SlotOrdering

We plan to extend to values in @processStatus to form the complete life cycle of a train(part). This from pre designed conceptual slots from a governmental agency that oversees developing the rail network over operators giving bids to the infrastructure manager approving the timetable.

We use the attribute @proccessStatus and not @pathStatus as it gives us more flexibility as it is placed on <trainPart>, <train> and <trainGroup>. @pathStatus is only under <trainpartSequence>. This "middle position" gives an implicit referring to the parent <train> and the child <trainPart>. We would like to be more flexible. Especially as we are working on extensions for <trainGroup> and using <trainPart> without a <train> to make generic path descriptions (forum post currently in draft).

What happened with the development idea for a general sub element <status> (similar to IS:state) in this forum string?: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=578&am p;&srch=status#msg_578

We should consolidate the enumeration lists in @proccessStatus and @pathStatus (and maybe even look to IS:state@status?) and think for a proper placement in the scheme.

In principal we like the enumeration list in @pathStatus extended with a "conceptual" value and the "actual" value from @proccesStatus.

Both enumeration lists (@proccessStatus and @pathStatus) lack definition of their values. This should be amended. We have some suggestions.

I would like to ask the TT coordinator or the stated participants who use this attribute and have declared that they "want to replace the use with other standard compliant representations in the medium term", to declare the intended replacement here in the forum.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Meaning and usage of @shuntingTime
Next Topic: Extension suggestion for alternativeSectionTT
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Sun May 05 00:21:54 CEST 2024