|
|
Re: NetRelation inconsistency for specific topology [message #2232 is a reply to message #2222] |
Mon, 26 August 2019 13:06 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](/forum/theme/default/images/down.png) |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 458 Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Fabiana,
Am 12.07.2019 um 18:24 schrieb Fabiana Diotallevi:
> [...]
> In particular, if we consider the netRelation joining
> netElements ne_02 and ne_03 (upper and lower central
> tracks), both of the following relations could be exported:
>
> <netRelation id="nr_0203" positionOnA="0" positionOnB="0"
> navigability="None">
> <elementA ref="ne_02"/>
> <elementB ref="ne_03"/>
> </netRelation>
>
> <netRelation id="nr_0203" positionOnA="1" positionOnB="1"
> navigability="None">
> <elementA ref="ne_02"/>
> <elementB ref="ne_03"/>
> </netRelation>
>
> There is no way to decide which one is the preferred one,
> and I can't export both of them because they have the same
> id and railML does not allow for a duplicate.
>
> Is there a way to solve this problem?
Yes, there is a way how to solve this problem:
In railML, IDs of elements must be unique (otherwise the parser will
throw an error). Further, an ID must not be used to "carry" information.
The ID must only be used for file internal identification (and
referencing). Thus, the ID "aqwzdq278fcas" is an even better ID than
"nr_0203". However, for purpose of understanding, the Simple Example
uses "readable" ID, but the used ID pattern is not mandatory. So, if I
programmed your exporting interface, I would take IDs based on
incrementing numbers (like a counter). Thus, although both netRelations
would connect the same netElements, they would have different IDs (e.g.
"e316" and "e317").
Best regards
Christian
--
Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Phone Coordinator: +49 173 2714509; railML.org: +49 351 47582911
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railml.org
Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
Re: NetRelation inconsistency for specific topology [message #2250 is a reply to message #2232] |
Tue, 17 September 2019 10:31 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/default/images/up.png) |
Fabiana Diotallevi
Messages: 21 Registered: October 2018
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear Jörg and Christian,
thank you very much for your feedback, the point is clear.
Since we need to export netElements and netRelations Ids from the drawing, we need a rule to automatically assign the Ids. At the same time, for sake of clarity, these Ids have to be "readable" for the user, in order to easily check the correctness of the exported xml file.
After some thoughts on this topic we have internally decided to define the rule that assigns the netRelation Id as follows:
nr_<ne1>_<ne2>_<connectingId>
where <ne1> and <ne2> are the ids of the involved netElements, while <connectingId> id the id of the connecting entity (switch/joint ...).
Therefore, the snippet of the exported railML file related to the attached figure shall be:
<netRelation id="nr_0203_swi01" positionOnA="0" positionOnB="0" navigability="None">
<elementA ref="ne_02"/>
<elementB ref="ne_03"/>
</netRelation>
<netRelation id="nr_0203_swi02" positionOnA="1" positionOnB="1" navigability="None">
<elementA ref="ne_02"/>
<elementB ref="ne_03"/>
</netRelation>
Hope this solution can help also other community members.
f.
|
|
|