[railML3] Functional type parameter for the balise group element [message #2431] |
Thu, 07 May 2020 18:10 |
Davide Venturucci
Messages: 1 Registered: March 2020
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear all,
in the last discussion in the railML ETCS group is been proposed to add a "functional type" to the balise group element.
The main functional types that could be added are described in detail below:
• NetworkRegistration: the balise is used to transmit connection information to the mobile network (Subset 026 P45 Radio Network registration)
• Connection: the balise is used to transmit connection information to an RBC (Subset 026 P42 Session Management)
• Announcement: the balise is used to announce a level transition to a train (Subset 026 P41 or P46 Level Transition Order or Conditional Level Transition Order). Could be also used to transmit Subset 026 P90 Track Ahead Free up to level 2/3 transition location.
• Border: the balise is used to order a level transition to a train (Subset 026 P41 or P46 Level Transition Order or Conditional Level Transition Order)
• Handover: the balise is used to trigger a connection with a neighboring RBC (Subset 026 P131 RBC transition order)
• Normal: the balise is used in all the other context.
What does the community think about this proposal? Is there any suggestion or change proposal on functional types?
Best regards,
Davide
[Updated on: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:38] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: [railML3] Functional type parameter for the balise group element [message #2444 is a reply to message #2439] |
Fri, 22 May 2020 15:23 |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 447 Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Henrik and Davide,
Henrik Roslund wrote on Thu, 14 May 2020 15:46
...
I can see a need for the "functional type" information in, e.g. a planning/test tool.
E.g. the user wants to place in the GUI a "Network Registration Balise Group", and not a "Balise Group with Packet 45". In the back of the tool will the "Network Registration Balise Group" be translated into a "Balise Group with Packet 45".
So, considering both of your posts, I conclude that we either include information about ETCS packet (e.g. "number 45") or add a type specifier with explicit values (e.g. "Network Registration Balise Group"). Current implementation of balise in railML 3.1 does not include any of these information. For reading and modelling purposes I prefer the option with explicit type specification. Are there any other opinions from the railML community?
Best regards
Christian
Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|