| Re: [railML3] Proposal of a semantic constraint for mileageChange [message #3085 is a reply to message #3081] |
Wed, 10 May 2023 15:55   |
Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 68
Registered: March 2008
|
Member |
|
|
Dear all,
I think we should be very careful about assuming what (every)one expects. Why would one expect never to find a netElement that is split at a mileage change? In that case, would it not be expected that the mileage change refers to the end of one and the start of the other? Or should this be modelled without any mileage change?
Why do we need the attributes from and to at all? Is it not given that the spot locations given for the mileage change represent the same location? And the type attribute takes care of the order.
Best regards,
Thomas
Thomas Nygreen – Common Schema Coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
