Template:Table/Dev:Semantic Constraints: Difference between revisions
[unchecked revision] | [unchecked revision] |
m (typo) |
(added opinion of ETCS WG on IS:014) |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
|2024-02-26 ETCS WG | |2024-02-26 ETCS WG | ||
2024-03-22 SCTP WG | 2024-03-22 SCTP WG | ||
2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
| | | | ||
|Starting time stamp (e.g. "from") shall be lower or equal any ending time stamp (e.g. "to") if both are given. Must not overlap with other validity periods. | |Starting time stamp (e.g. "from") shall be lower or equal any ending time stamp (e.g. "to") if both are given. Must not overlap with other validity periods. | ||
Line 70: | Line 72: | ||
|2024-02-26 ETCS WG | |2024-02-26 ETCS WG | ||
2024-03-22 SCTP WG | 2024-03-22 SCTP WG | ||
2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
| | | | ||
|{{IS:Tag|trainProtectionElement}} shall only be used for national and/or legacy train protection systems. ETCS-based systems must not be modeled using {{IS:Tag|trainProtectionElement}}. | |{{IS:Tag|trainProtectionElement}} shall only be used for national and/or legacy train protection systems. ETCS-based systems must not be modeled using {{IS:Tag|trainProtectionElement}}. | ||
Line 77: | Line 81: | ||
|2023-10-23 | |2023-10-23 | ||
|2024-02-26 ETCS WG | |2024-02-26 ETCS WG | ||
2024-03-22 SCTP WG | 2024-03-22 SCTP WG | ||
2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
| | | | ||
|{{IS:Tag|levelCrossingIS}} should not have a {{IS:Tag|crossesElement}} child of type railway. This case should be represented either by a {{IS:Tag|crossing}} in case of a simple crossing, or by a {{IS:Tag|switchIS}} of type doubleSwitchCrossing or singleSwitchCrossing. | |{{IS:Tag|levelCrossingIS}} should not have a {{IS:Tag|crossesElement}} child of type railway. This case should be represented either by a {{IS:Tag|crossing}} in case of a simple crossing, or by a {{IS:Tag|switchIS}} of type doubleSwitchCrossing or singleSwitchCrossing. | ||
Line 92: | Line 99: | ||
|2024-01-22 | |2024-01-22 | ||
|2024-03-22 SCTP WG | |2024-03-22 SCTP WG | ||
2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
Line 100: | Line 108: | ||
|2024-01-29 | |2024-01-29 | ||
|2024-02-26 ETCS WG | |2024-02-26 ETCS WG | ||
2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
Line 154: | Line 163: | ||
|IS:012 | |IS:012 | ||
|2024-03-04 | |2024-03-04 | ||
| | |2024-04-19 SCTP WG | ||
2024-05-13 ETCS WG | |||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
Line 165: | Line 175: | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
there can be no two functional infrastructure or geometry entities of the same type located at the same coordinate of spot location, e.g. two railway switches or two gradient curves having the same linear coordinate make no sense. Except for the entities linked by the @belongsToParent attribute and railway crossing modelled as switch of type "doubleSwitchCrossing" and two railway switches of type "switchCrossingPart". | <s>there can be no two functional infrastructure or geometry entities of the same type located at the same coordinate of spot location, e.g. two railway switches or two gradient curves having the same linear coordinate make no sense. Except for the entities linked by the @belongsToParent attribute and railway crossing modelled as switch of type "doubleSwitchCrossing" and two railway switches of type "switchCrossingPart".</s> wording will be improved | ||
|- | |- style="font-style: italic; color: red;" | ||
|{{RTM:Tag|linearPositioningSystem|ex=1|wiki=3}} | |{{RTM:Tag|linearPositioningSystem|ex=1|wiki=3}} | ||
|IS:014 | |IS:014 | ||
|2024-04-08 | |2024-04-08 | ||
|2024-04-15 NEST WG | |||
2024-04-19 SCTP WG | |||
| | | | ||
| | |||
{{@|startMeasure|RTM:linearPositioningSystem}} and {{@|endMeasure|RTM:linearPositioningSystem}} are start and end values of a railway {{IS:Tag|line|ex=1|wiki=3}} associated with {{RTM:Tag|linearPositioningSystem|ex=1|wiki=3}} not max and min values of a current file with e.g. line section. | |||
* Implementation for infrastructure surveys is not clear https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=3231&th=946#msg_3231 | |||
* 2024-05-13 ETCS WG customers may not have info on start and end values of a railway {{IS:Tag|line|ex=1|wiki=3}} | |||
|- | |||
|{{IS:Tag|netRelation|ex=1|wiki=3}} | |||
|IS:015 | |||
|2024-04-22 | |||
| | |||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
There must be no "inverse" net relations in the topology, i.e. if "nr1 elemeneA ne1", "nr1 elementB ne2" and "nr2 elemeneA ne2", "nr2 elementB ne1" then topology is not valid. See invalid code below. | |||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
{{interwiki}} | {{interwiki}} |
Latest revision as of 12:19, 13 May 2024
Element | ID | Proposal date | Date of acception | Date of deprecation | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
<TT:operationalTrainSectionPart> | TT:001 | 2022-09-15 | 2022-10-13 | There is always only a single successor and predecessor for an <operationalTrainSectionPart> in the chain of <operationalTrainSectionPart>s that are linked via the attribute @next. | |
<TT:operationalTrainVariant> | TT:002 | 2023-01-12 | 2023-04-06 | When calculating which <operationalTrainVariant> of an <operationalTrain> is valid on a particular day always a maximum of one active <operationalTrainVariant> shall be the result. If the result is more than one <operationalTrainVariant>, all except one shall be marked as <isCancelled> or <isOnRequest>. | |
<TT:commercialTrainVariant> | TT:003 | 2023-01-12 | 2023-04-06 | When calculating which <commercialTrainVariant> of an <commercialTrain> is valid on a particular day always a maximum of one active <commercialTrainVariant> shall be the result. If the result is more than one <commercialTrainVariant>, all except one shall be marked as <isCancelled> or <isOnRequest>. | |
<TT:operationalTrainSection> | TT:004 | 2022-01-12 | 2023-03-09 | The itinerary sections of an <operationalTrainVariant>, defined by the <operationalTrainSection>s and their respective <range>s, that are not <isCancelled> and not marked as <isOnRequest>, must be pairwise disjoint, except for their respective first and last <baseItineraryPoint>s. | |
<TT:operationalTrainSection> | TT:005 | 2022-01-12 | 2023-03-09 | The first(last) <baseItineraryPoint> of each <operationalTrainSection> within an <operationalTrainVariant> must either be the referenced <itinerary>'s first(last) <baseItineraryPoint>, or coincide with another section's last(first) <baseItineraryPoint>. | |
<TT:commercialTrainSection> | TT:006 | 2022-01-12 | 2023-03-09 | The itinerary sections of an <commercialTrainVariant>, defined by the <commercialTrainSection>s and their respective <range>s, that are not <isCancelled> and not marked as <isOnRequest>, must be pairwise disjoint, except for their respective first and last <baseItineraryPoint>s. | |
<TT:commercialTrainSection> | TT:007 | 2022-01-12 | 2023-03-09 | The first(last) <baseItineraryPoint> of each <commercialTrainSection> within an <commercialTrainVariant> must either be the referenced <itinerary>'s first(last) <baseItineraryPoint>, or coincide with another section's last(first) <baseItineraryPoint>. | |
<RTM:isValid>, <CO:validityTime:period> | IS:001 | 2024-01-15 | 2024-02-26 ETCS WG
2024-03-22 SCTP WG 2024-04-15 NEST WG |
Starting time stamp (e.g. "from") shall be lower or equal any ending time stamp (e.g. "to") if both are given. Must not overlap with other validity periods. | |
<IS:trainProtectionElement> | IS:002 | 2021-02-26 | 2024-02-26 ETCS WG
2024-03-22 SCTP WG 2024-04-15 NEST WG |
<trainProtectionElement> shall only be used for national and/or legacy train protection systems. ETCS-based systems must not be modeled using <trainProtectionElement>. | |
<IS:levelCrossingIS> | IS:003 | 2023-10-23 | 2024-02-26 ETCS WG
2024-03-22 SCTP WG 2024-04-15 NEST WG |
<levelCrossingIS> should not have a <crossesElement> child of type railway. This case should be represented either by a <crossing> in case of a simple crossing, or by a <switchIS> of type doubleSwitchCrossing or singleSwitchCrossing. | |
<IS:underCrossing>, <IS:overCrossing> | IS:004 | 2023-10-23 | was declined | 2024-02-26 | should only have a <crossesElement> child of type railway when railway crosses railway (not on the same level!). |
<IS:signalConstruction> | IS:005 | 2024-01-22 | 2024-03-22 SCTP WG
2024-04-15 NEST WG |
@height and @positionAtTrack should not be used with @type=virtual. | |
<IS:line> | IS:006 | 2024-01-29 | 2024-02-26 ETCS WG
2024-04-15 NEST WG |
each line with own mileage should always be associated with its own <linearPositioningSystem>, i.e. Advanced example of railML has three lines with their own mileages, thus should have thee <linearPositioningSystem>s. 2024-03-22 SCTP WG - GUI implementation not clear | |
<IS:border> | IS:007 | 2024-01-29 |
if @isOpenEnd="true" then statement @type="area" is true. | ||
<IS:netElement> | IS:008 | 2024-02-02 |
Aggregation of net elements should follow the tree data structure. See figure below. This means that no two (mesoscopic) net elements can aggregate same (microscopic) net element. In other words, (microscopic) net element can be aggregated by at most one (mesoscopic) net element. | ||
<IS:netElement> | IS:009 | 2024-02-02 |
Linear (geometric) coordinates (explicit or implicit, e.g. calculated as a sum of the coordinate of beginning and the length of the net element) of the same place represented at different levels of aggregation should have the same value. In the figure below (linear) coordinate the coordinate of e.g. end of ne1 should be same as one of ne1.2. | ||
<IS:netElement> | IS:010 | 2024-02-26 |
| ||
<IS:netElement> | IS:011 | 2024-02-29 |
Aggregation must not happen within the same level of detail. In the figure below, element 1.1 must not aggregate element 1.2. This means that aggregating and aggregated net elements must not be referred from the same <level> | ||
<RTM:spotLocation> | IS:012 | 2024-03-04 | 2024-04-19 SCTP WG
2024-05-13 ETCS WG |
@pos should have only positive values because it's a distance, thus -1 is not a valid value | |
functional infrastructure and geometry entities | IS:013 | 2024-03-25 |
| ||
<RTM:linearPositioningSystem> | IS:014 | 2024-04-08 | 2024-04-15 NEST WG
2024-04-19 SCTP WG |
@startMeasure and @endMeasure are start and end values of a railway <IS:line> associated with <RTM:linearPositioningSystem> not max and min values of a current file with e.g. line section.
| |
<IS:netRelation> | IS:015 | 2024-04-22 |
There must be no "inverse" net relations in the topology, i.e. if "nr1 elemeneA ne1", "nr1 elementB ne2" and "nr2 elemeneA ne2", "nr2 elementB ne1" then topology is not valid. See invalid code below. |