| Re: [railML3.2] Cant Deficiency Class for RS and/or TT [message #2895 is a reply to message #2891] |
Tue, 01 February 2022 10:22  |
Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Jörg,
we will surely need possible brake positions separated from cant deficiency classes (as already existing in railML). This leads to possible contradictions between "original" brake positions and such encoded into integers of cant deficiency classes.
I understand that this does not necessarily need to be a direct redundancy. So, I do not dare to have a final conclusion here. However, in such cases it was at least in the past tradition in railML to tend to the basic physical values and leave the higher "aggregated" values to the context of the reading software. (For instance, this also applies to track classes A..E which can only be given within a certain national context. So, railML encodes the basic physical values of axle load and load spread.)
If there would be a resulting integer in railML like in UNISIG, there should also be the "original" cant deficiency separated.
Best regards,
Dirk.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
