Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » Extension suggestion for <upTime> (uptime, railML 2.4nor, railML2.5, railML3 development)
Description of <upTime>@mode (Re: Extension suggestion for <upTime>) [message #2339 is a reply to message #2330] Fri, 21 February 2020 21:40 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Vasco Paul Kolmorgen
Messages: 55
Registered: November 2004
Member
Dear Torben, dear all,

I don't want to anticipate the discussion by the community about the
proposed extensions, but I would like to contribute something to the
meaning of the individual values at <ocp> <propOperational><uptime>@mode:

Am 18.02.2020 um 03:06 schrieb Torben Brand:
> Furthermore, we are looking for a description of the value
> "off" in <upTime>@mode. What does this value stand for?

- „manned“: The <ocp> is operational/usable and staffed with IM's
personnel ready for operation on site (in the area of the <ocp>).
- „unmanned“: The <ocp> is operational/usable and not staffed with on
site personnel by the IM. Even the <ocp> is not controlled or is remote
controlled by any staff of the IM and there is no IM’s staff is
available in the area of the <ocp>.
- „off“: The <ocp> is temporarily not operational/usable. No
information about local staff is given by this value. Please note that
the values <ocp><states><state>@status={disabled|closed} shall be used
for a long-term non-defined or permanent disabling of an <ocp>.

Additonally the following semantic constraints should apply:
- an <ocp> with attribute @operationalType“blockSignal“ shall not have
<propOperational><uptime>@mode=“manned“ (as a manned blockSignal shall
be modelled in railML 2.x as blockPost),
- an <ocp> with attribute @operationalType=“stoppingPoint“ shall not
have <propOperational><uptime>@mode=“manned“ (as a stoppingPoint has no
operational usage and therefore no operational staff by the IM),
- an enumeration of several time periods by @from and @until for one
<ocp> shall not overlap so that for every time there shall be a unique
status of <uptime>.

What do you think about?
Are there additional semantic constraints to be described?

Best regards,
--
Vasco Paul Kolmorgen - Governance Coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Phone railML.org: +49 351 47582911
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Suggested extension for operating rules
Next Topic: Re: [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Apr 30 06:55:03 CEST 2024