| Re: Missing attributes and maybe elements in railML3.2 for RTCI-a [message #3172 is a reply to message #3145] |
Thu, 07 December 2023 13:02   |
Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 68
Registered: March 2008
|
Member |
|
|
christian.rahmig wrote on Wed, 18 October 2023 17:33
(3) Train protection system change
The concept for train protection system changes is similar to the electrification change issue in (2). Maybe, the term "trainProtectionSection" would be better than "trainProtectionElement" if we want to describe a certain train protection system setting in a rather macroscopic style. So, dear community, what do you think: do we need an <trainProtectionSection> in addition to a <trainProtectionElement> or shall we rename <trainProtectionElement> into <trainProtectionSection> or shall we leave everything as it is?
To add some context for the community, railML 2 has both trainProtectionElement (for individual magnets etc.) and trainProtectionChange (for points where something about the system changes). These elements are syntactically quite similar, the main difference being that trainProtectionChange has an attribute to specify if the monitoring is intermittent, continuous or none at all. That same attribute is also present in the railML 3 element trainProtectionElement, so syntactically it has the capabilities of both the two elements from railML 2.
If we decide to use the same element for both purposes, I think we need a name that does not contain either Element or Section, as they both indicate a specific usage.
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
