| Re: [railML 3] Areas in railML 3 [message #2833 is a reply to message #2832] |
Mon, 27 September 2021 12:12   |
Fabiana Diotallevi
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2018
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear Thomas,
I agree with you that there is the need to define, from a topological point of view, the "area" concept, that could be used and referred to from many different "tags".
As you said, to identify an area we could use the <areaLocation> tag, because it is basically a collection of netElements. However, I think that we should improve such definition for two main reasons:
1. In the current <areaLocation> definition, you don't have the possibility to define multiple intervals spanning the same netElement (if you want for example to define a "U"-shaped area), since you only have the possibility to specify a starting and a ending position on one netelement.
2. I think that it is important to define areas in the <topology> section (i.e. at the same level of the neteElements) so that any infrastructure or interlocking element could refer just the areaId without re-definig its location.
If we stick just to the topological definition of an area, we don't need to define a "type" attribute.
However, in this case we may have to introduce a more general "zone" object, with a "type" attribute, an "external" reference and an "areaId" reference.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
