| Re: [railML3] Validities without bitMask [message #2922 is a reply to message #2921] |
Fri, 25 February 2022 11:06   |
Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Milan,
we already have a choice between:
<OperatingDayValidity>: without timetable period (TTP), without timetable-period-long bitmask, with one or several weekday-bitmasks,
<BitmaskValidity>: with (obligatory) timetable period, with (obligatory) timetable-period-long bitmask, with (optional) weekday-bitmasks.
I think this is staigth-forward and consequent. I do not welcome a third, mixed in-between option.
If there is a timetable period, it is imho not too much demanded to create the TTP-bitmask only for the export.
> ...one easily could also take the opposite
> position and agrue that if it is so easy it does not need to
> be transferred with railML
The point is that the weekday-bitmasks are optional: So, for importers, there would have to be one more "if" fork in the source code. For the exporter which doesn't already have a TTP-bitmask, it is not an "if" to create it.
The TTP-bitmask should be a fixed target point under <BitmaskValidity> for importers. As we say in German: "Kleinvieh macht auch Mist" - let's limit the numbers of "if"s for importers.
Regards, Dirk.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
