| Re: [railML2] Clearer modelling of the signal designation [message #2351 is a reply to message #2342] |
Wed, 26 February 2020 16:59   |
Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 68
Registered: March 2008
|
Member |
|
|
Dear Tobias,
I do not think that the example violates the rules. "A1" is a human-readable signal name. As Torben points out, the name does not follow any semantic constraints. Therefore, another name might be equally valid and informative to a human user. For a specific purpose, such as mirroring the text on the identification board attached to the signal post, there should be a specific modelling. I will leave the more detailed discussion to my colleague Christian.
Best,
Thomas
Thomas Nygreen – Common Schema Coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
