| Re: [railML2] extension suggestion for the element <state> for working zones [message #2820 is a reply to message #2814] |
Fri, 20 August 2021 17:56  |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 436
Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Torben,
dear all,
in order to differentiate between the two elements with their different characteristics and application, Thomas and me discussed a renaming. Our proposal looks like this (please also see forum post [1]):
* the microscopic work zone relevant for its integration into interlocking systems shall be modelled as optional, but repeatable child element <workZone> of <controller>. For getting the exact location of the work zone, the referenced <genericArea> provides these information.
* the macroscopic "section of impairment" is a part of a track or a railway line, where due to various reasons (including track works) railway operation is affected, e.g. by extending travel times. These sections are modelled as <impairmentSection> child elements of <track>. Their exact location can be also assessed by following the link to the <genericArea>. In addition, they can be attributed with additional running times.
The proposed solution is documented in Trac tickets #393 [2] and #395 [3]. In case anyone of you has any remarks on this proposal, now is the ftime to do so...
[1] https:// www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=813&goto=281 9&#msg_2819
[2] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/393
[3] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/395
BR
Christian
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
