Re: [railML2] extension suggestion for the element <state> for working zones [message #2792 is a reply to message #2766] |
Fri, 16 July 2021 14:56 |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 465 Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Torben,
dear all,
based on Trac ticket #395 [1] I implemented the <additionalRunningTime> within <area> as a first version. In that context, the following challenges should be considered in the discussion:
* A direction dependency as modelled with <additionalRunningTime>@dir is not feasible with areas that are not directly linked with tracks, e.g. an information area around an OCP.
* A direction dependency as modelled with <additionalRunningTime>@dir is not feasible with areas that span over several tracks having different directions.
So, we should clarify it once again: for which scenarios the <additionalRunningTime> (with direction dependency) is needed? Can you provide an example? Any comments are highly appreciated...
[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/395
Best regards
Christian
Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|