Re: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s? [message #2070 is a reply to message #2066] |
Thu, 03 January 2019 19:41 |
Thomas Nygreen JBD
Messages: 68 Registered: February 2017
|
Member |
|
|
Hi Jörg,
Would this not be the same for all subschemas? At least, both infrastructure and timetables have phases during their planning. Yet, the infrastructure subschema does not have such a grouping of entities. Instead, all functional infrastructure entities are in one view, only grouped into containers by type. I would welcome a coordination of the strategies in the different schemas.
Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen
Railway capacity engineer
Jernbanedirektoratet
|
|
|