| [railML3] Modelling location of <overCrossing>, <underCrossing> in the network [message #3277] |
Tue, 13 August 2024 11:23 |
Larissa Zhuchyi
Messages: 43
Registered: November 2022
|
Member |
|
|
Dear all
Currently spot-, linear, <areaLocation> are optional children of all the functional IS entities. Even though the first step of restricting usage of RTM withing railML3 are present now in the Positioning approach [1], it is still not clear what are the preferred ways of modelling and how to interpret the spotLocation of functional IS entity with sure linear extent.
Therefore, taking an example of tunnel and bridges (overCrossing [2], underCrossing [3]) railML.org suggests for your consideration the following best practices of modelling.
General modelling principles:
1) <areaLocation> should not be used for modelling of <underCrossing> and <overCrossing>;
2) both <linearLocation> and <spotLocation> are acceptable.
Cases in order of preference:
1) <linearLocation> + (@intrinsicCoordBegin and @intrinsicCoordEnd) or (<linearCoordinateBegin> and <linearCoordinateEnd>)*;
2) <spotLocation> + @intrinsicCoord or <linearCoordinate>* + length;
3) <spotLocation> + @intrinsicCoord or <linearCoordinate>*.
* mandatory according to the positioning approach [1]
Interpretation of the above three cases:
1) Data on both beginning and ending of -crossing is provided;
2) Coordinate provided represents beginning of -crossing, length is known;
3) Coordinate provided represents the centre of -crossing, length is unknown.
Please answer the following questions:
1) Do you agree with the suggested modelling principles and cases?
2) Should the set of cases be extended?
3) How should the case of incomplete data be handled? For example, user has a coordinate somewhere within -crossing and cannot make data more precise. Therefore, none of the suggested above cases is applicable.
Keep in mind that incomplete data is also a part of forum post in the context of provision of the real-life beginning and ending mileage values of the railway line [4].
When consensus is reached these best practices could be step by step extrapolated to all the functional IS elements with length child or attribute e.g. line, platform, platformEdge, track.
[1] https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=920& start=0&
[2] https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:overCrossing
[3] https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:underCrossing
[4] https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=946& start=0&
Sincerely,
Larissa Zhuchyi – Ontology Researcher
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
[Updated on: Wed, 14 August 2024 12:32] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
