railML.org issueshttps://development.railml.org/groups/railml/-/issues2024-03-22T14:35:51+01:00https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/534Fixing baliseGroup/@applicationType2024-03-22T14:35:51+01:00CO OntologyFixing baliseGroup/@applicationType## Description
baliseGroup/applicationType is an element that allows to assign a group of balises corresponding train protection system with @value attribute.
@value is optional. When omitting @value baliseGroup/applicationType has no ...## Description
baliseGroup/applicationType is an element that allows to assign a group of balises corresponding train protection system with @value attribute.
@value is optional. When omitting @value baliseGroup/applicationType has no sense.
## Proposed solution railML3.3
Make baliseGroup/applicationType@value mandatory in railML3.3.3.3TT CoordinationTT Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/533Extending <isTrainMovementSignal>2024-03-22T13:32:26+01:00CO OntologyExtending <isTrainMovementSignal>## Description
signalIS/isTrainMovementSignal is now an empty ambiguous container.
### Background
There is a need to to distinguish between the physical and functional properties of the railway signals as well as represent schematic t...## Description
signalIS/isTrainMovementSignal is now an empty ambiguous container.
### Background
There is a need to to distinguish between the physical and functional properties of the railway signals as well as represent schematic track plan by railML3 .
### Links
* Forum discussion:
* https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=3217&#msg_3217
* Wiki documentation:
* IS:signalIS: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:signalIS
## Proposed solution railML 3.3
Extend <isTrainMovementSignal> with:
(5) @isShunting, @isRepeater flags
(6) @type attribute with "main", "distant" enumeration
These will have the following definitions.
- main: signal with highest safety level for train movement authority
- distant: this signal indicates the aspect of an upcoming movement signal but gives no movement authority on it own.
- repeater: this signal repeats the aspect of a movement signal/the movement authority.
- shunting: signal for degraded safety level for train movement (secondary to "main", but with more flexible operations)3.3https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/345IL: signal lamps and base types2024-03-22T13:07:59+01:00IL CoordinationIL: signal lamps and base types## Description
It is necessary to define the particular lamps of a signal plus the mapping between the aspect and the activated lamps for a particular signal.
In that way it would be useful to define base types of signals, i.e. two lamp...## Description
It is necessary to define the particular lamps of a signal plus the mapping between the aspect and the activated lamps for a particular signal.
In that way it would be useful to define base types of signals, i.e. two lamps main signal, three lamps main signal etc.
As of 2024-03-22 there is a need to distinguish between physical and functional properties of railway signals as well as unambiguously represent signals of the schematic track plan in railML3.
### Background
### Links
* Forum discussion:
* https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=786&start=0&
* https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=899&start=0&
* Wiki documentation:
* IL:signalIL: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IL:signalIL
## Proposed solution railML 3.3
In the presentation from the post of Mr von Lingen [1] slides 8, 11. See the attachments. The preliminary changes are as follows:
- deprecation of signalIL/@function="main"
- deprecation of signalIL/@function="main+shunting"
- add child signalLamps of signalIL with the following attributes: @name, @colour, @type, @voltage, @power
- add child of signalLamps with the following fields usesLamp@ref, usesLaml@flashing, usesLamp@frequency
- add element signalIndicator with the following fields: allowsAspect@ref, hasDefaulAspect@ref, attribute @type with following enumeration "cautiousDriwing, speedIndicator, distantSpeedIndicator, directionIndicator, distantDirectionIndicator, wrongTrackIndicator"
![image](/uploads/e32711fc34347beaa9bd349ebff59801/image.png)
![image](/uploads/b20db7f3e3eae6da09e1942b83eb26b4/image.png)
[1] https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=899&goto=3164&#msg_31643.3IL CoordinationIL Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/531Extending the <border> element2024-03-13T14:13:54+01:00CO OntologyExtending the <border> element## Description
<border> has attribute @type with enumeration and some of the values "infrastructureManager", "country", "state", "tariff" for transport associations. There is no way to refer to the organizational unit or provide further...## Description
<border> has attribute @type with enumeration and some of the values "infrastructureManager", "country", "state", "tariff" for transport associations. There is no way to refer to the organizational unit or provide further description about country or state.
### Background
User can refer to the infrastructureManager from the <operationalPoint> element. However according to the railML's coordinators not every border is an operational point.
### Links
* Forum discussion:
* Thu, 26 October 2023 10:10: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=928&start=0&
* Wiki documentation:
* IS:border: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:border
## Proposed solution railML3
Based on the request of the users the optional attributes @organizationalUnitRef and @description should be added for references to the organizational units and providing description about countries and states.3.3https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/351railML 3.x Advanced Example2024-02-14T10:01:22+01:00IS CoordinationrailML 3.x Advanced Example## Description
Since railML 3.x introduces new modelling concepts, documentation of the data exchange format need to enclose more detailed information, in particular for newcomers. The **Simple Example** Tutorial provides such a "Hello ...## Description
Since railML 3.x introduces new modelling concepts, documentation of the data exchange format need to enclose more detailed information, in particular for newcomers. The **Simple Example** Tutorial provides such a "Hello world" documentation for a very simple scenario. The **Advanced Example** shall be based on the Simple Example and extend its content to cover further modelling aspects and railML 3.x use cases.
### Background
**This ticket shall be used as a collector for requirements and needs concerning the content of the upcoming Advanced Example**. It was initiated following the 3rd railML 3.1 Workshop that took place in Prague on November 15, 2018. Wishes for further content to be added to the Advanced Example can be expressed in the railML forum and/or in the meetings and conf calls of the different developer groups.
### Links
* Simple Example:
* download at railML website: [https://www.railml.org/en/user/exampledata.html]
* as part of railML 3.1 final release: [https://svn.railml.org/railML3/tags/railML-3.1-final/]
## Proposed solution
The Advanced Example shall contain the following elements from **infrastructure** domain:
1. Border (e.g. between different IM)
1. Balises and balise groups
1. Mileage changes (gaps, overlaps)
1. ~~Electrifications~~ implemented with version 10
1. ~~divided station tracks within a station (several isolated sections, each with its own train number field) in connection with different stopping places at one station track~~ implemented with version 8
1. ~~two lines in form of an "Y" to support [train coupling and sharing](https://wiki.railml.org/index.php? title=Dev:Train_Coupling_And_Sharing) with four stations~~ implemented with version 2
1. ~~one stoppingPoint so that a train can pass an OCP~~ implemented with version 2
1. ~~different levels of topology (micro, meso,~~ macro) implemented with version 2
1. ~~crossing~~ implemented with version 2
1. ~~single switch crossing~~ implemented with version 2
1. ~~stabling track (siding track for storing vehicle)~~ implemented with version 2
1. parts of stations to exemplify @ocpParentRef usage [2]
1. ETCS e.g. level transitions [2]
1. shunting signals and insulated joints to allow for shunting [1]
1. a line without switchable signals and with self-restoring points [1]
1. ~~derailers~~
1. direction and speed indicators [1]
1. ~~temporary vs. permanent speed restrictions~~ [1] implemented with version 2
1. geoCoorginates [2]
1. ~~stationCodes [2]~~ implemented with version 4
1. deflecting speed of the railway switches
1. gradients [2]
1. ~~tunnels [2]~~ implemented with version 2
1. combination of signals where main signal and distant signal are on the same post (same location/absPos) [2]
1. routes [2]
1. tvd [2]
1. trainProtectionSystemChange [2]
1. eliminate anagrams from the names of lines
[1] Dirk Bräuer, 01.04.2020: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=697&goto=2411&#msg_2411
[2] Torben Brand 29 August 2023 https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=3118&th=914#msg_3118
_... to be continued ..._3.2IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/530Versions of registers2024-01-12T16:21:11+01:00CO CoordinationVersions of registersBane NOR has requested to be able to specify a version on designators: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=938&start=0&
While major changes in the meaning of a rulebook entry should not occur without a changed rulebook regis...Bane NOR has requested to be able to specify a version on designators: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=938&start=0&
While major changes in the meaning of a rulebook entry should not occur without a changed rulebook register name, the topic of versions, revisions etc. of registers and external documents will become relevant at other situations, too. Therefore, a general approach on how the schema can deal with these revisions and versions of external resources (not only in infrastructure, but maybe also in rollingstock or timetable) may be useful for future railML versions.3.3CO CoordinationCO Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/529Create wiki documentation for IS:etcsLevelTransition2024-01-11T17:33:39+01:00TT CoordinationCreate wiki documentation for IS:etcsLevelTransitionThe ETCS working group created a draft documentation for the railML 3 element etcsLevelTransition. It also includes information on the subelement switchToLevel. From this a wiki documentation shall be created.
ETCS Working group documen...The ETCS working group created a draft documentation for the railML 3 element etcsLevelTransition. It also includes information on the subelement switchToLevel. From this a wiki documentation shall be created.
ETCS Working group document: https://cloud.railml.org/f/89860 <br>
Wiki pages: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:etcsLevelTransition and https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:switchToLevel3.3IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/526Review wiki documentation for IS:speedSection2024-01-10T17:10:40+01:00TT CoordinationReview wiki documentation for IS:speedSectionThe documentation for IS:speedSection was taken over from the documentation provided by Karl-Friedemann Jerosch from Siemens.
However crosschecking the content I noticed that the picture for the first example is missing. Also there is a...The documentation for IS:speedSection was taken over from the documentation provided by Karl-Friedemann Jerosch from Siemens.
However crosschecking the content I noticed that the picture for the first example is missing. Also there is a statement that a speedSection would be required to at least reference one speed profile when actually looking at the xsd that does not seem to be the case.3.3IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/527Add examples from ETCS working group documentation to wiki page CO:speedProfile2024-01-10T17:10:19+01:00TT CoordinationAdd examples from ETCS working group documentation to wiki page CO:speedProfileThe ETCS working group has created a documentation for speedProfiles. Only a small part of this documentation was taken over to the railML 3 wiki. In particular the extensive example was not included in the documentation. This should be ...The ETCS working group has created a documentation for speedProfiles. Only a small part of this documentation was taken over to the railML 3 wiki. In particular the extensive example was not included in the documentation. This should be corrected after a review by the ETCS working group.
Documentation in question: https://cloud.railml.org/f/89853
Wiki page: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/CO:speedProfile3.3CO CoordinationCO Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/525Propose Semantic Constraint introduced by ETCS group2024-01-10T15:09:56+01:00TT CoordinationPropose Semantic Constraint introduced by ETCS groupThe ETCS working group introduced a semantic constraint for balise groups documented in the provided documentation for the element baliseGroup and balise. The following wording was proposed:
>The element “baliseGroup” shall always use t...The ETCS working group introduced a semantic constraint for balise groups documented in the provided documentation for the element baliseGroup and balise. The following wording was proposed:
>The element “baliseGroup” shall always use the railML option “spotLocation” to define the balise group location on the topology.
Also a justification for the semantic constraint was brought forth:
>According to UNISIG-026 (versions 2.3.0, 3.4.0 or 3.6.0), section 3.4.2.2.1 and UNISIG-040 (versions 2.3.0, 3.3.0 or 3.4.0) section 3.3.1.3, a balise group (represented by the railML element “baliseGroup”) shall be considered as point-shaped element without extension. The reference location of the balise group is the location of the balise with N_PIG=0.
A forum post should be created and if nobody disagrees the semantic constraint should be added to the wiki.3.3IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/524Improve Wiki documentation for IS:levelCrossingIS2024-01-09T16:19:15+01:00TT CoordinationImprove Wiki documentation for IS:levelCrossingISThe ETCS working group has prepared a document that could be used as a basis for an improved wiki documentation.
ETCS WG document: https://cloud.railml.org/f/82657 <br>
Wiki page to be improved: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:levelCr...The ETCS working group has prepared a document that could be used as a basis for an improved wiki documentation.
ETCS WG document: https://cloud.railml.org/f/82657 <br>
Wiki page to be improved: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:levelCrossingIS3.3IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/502Axle load related speed profiles2024-01-08T09:52:14+01:00IS CoordinationAxle load related speed profilesThe definition of axle load related speed profiles is not clear. Therefore, a renaming and extension of attributes in the related speed profile sub type is required.
### Links
* Discussion:
* ETCS use case working group, 11.03.2022: ...The definition of axle load related speed profiles is not clear. Therefore, a renaming and extension of attributes in the related speed profile sub type is required.
### Links
* Discussion:
* ETCS use case working group, 11.03.2022: https://www.railml.org/en/event-reader/railml-is-etcs-telco-2022-03-11.html
## Proposed solution railML 3.2
Rename attributes in element `<speedProfile / load>`
* `@maxAxleLoad` into `@exceedsAxleLoad`
* `@maxMeterLoad` into `@exceedsMeterLoad`
Introduce new attribute `@exceedsAxleLoadCategory`, that shall be based on an extendable enum with values "A", "B1", "B2", ... "E5". This enum already exists in IS. It is called `tLineCategory` or `tLineCategoryExt`. This enum datatype shall be moved from IS into CO domain.3.3TT CoordinationTT Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/523designator startDate and endDate2024-01-05T13:33:38+01:00CO Coordinationdesignator startDate and endDateIn railML 2, the `<designator>` element has `startDate` and `endDate` attributes in case the designator is only valid from or until a given date. [In a forum post](https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=933&start=0&) trafIT has ...In railML 2, the `<designator>` element has `startDate` and `endDate` attributes in case the designator is only valid from or until a given date. [In a forum post](https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=933&start=0&) trafIT has requested that these are also added to the `<designator>` element in railML 3, where they are currently missing. The use case is described well for [`<ocp>` in wiki2](https://wiki2.railml.org/wiki/IS:designator_ocp#Best_practice_&_Examples_/_Empfohlene_Anwendung_&_Beispiele).CO CoordinationCO Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/522Fixing genericArea location2023-12-08T10:53:03+01:00IS CoordinationFixing genericArea location## Description
The `<genericArea>` element has a mandatory child element `<location>`. This does not make sense for generic areas that do not have a circular or polygon location, but refer to area limits (child element `<isLimitedBy>`)....## Description
The `<genericArea>` element has a mandatory child element `<location>`. This does not make sense for generic areas that do not have a circular or polygon location, but refer to area limits (child element `<isLimitedBy>`). For railML 3.3 it is foreseen to set the mandatory element `<location>` to optional. For railML 3.2 a work-around based on zero-entries shall be applied.
### Background
### Links
* Forum discussion:
* Torben Brand, 10.10.2023: https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=925&start=0&
* Git issues:
* #479
* #522
* Wiki documentation:
* IS:genericArea: https://wiki3.railml.org/wiki/IS:genericArea
## Proposed solution railML 3
In railML 3.2: Workaround based on zero entries as documented in the wiki.
In railML 3.3: Setting child element `<location>` to optional.3.3IS CoordinationIS Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/521Consistent naming of simple types2023-12-04T10:53:40+01:00CO OntologyConsistent naming of simple typesSome does not begin with "t" e.g. EtcsLevelType, others do, e.g. tBaliseDuplicate. During Technical coordination meeting it was decided to remove "t" from the beginning of all the names.Some does not begin with "t" e.g. EtcsLevelType, others do, e.g. tBaliseDuplicate. During Technical coordination meeting it was decided to remove "t" from the beginning of all the names.3.3https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/518Consistent capitalization of enumeration values2023-12-04T10:20:39+01:00CO OntologyConsistent capitalization of enumeration valuesFor example, tNavigability and tDescriptionLevel begin with Uppercase while tApplicationDirection not. They should all begin with lowercase.For example, tNavigability and tDescriptionLevel begin with Uppercase while tApplicationDirection not. They should all begin with lowercase.3.3https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/150Sequence of ocpTT elements shall become 'required' (de: Abfolge der Betriebst...2023-12-04T09:57:06+01:00Deleted UserSequence of ocpTT elements shall become 'required' (de: Abfolge der Betriebstellen verpflichtend machen)As discussed in the Forum (http://www.railml.org/forum/rw/?group=2&offset=0&thread=83&id=240), the _sequence_ attribute in ocpTT should become **required**.As discussed in the Forum (http://www.railml.org/forum/rw/?group=2&offset=0&thread=83&id=240), the _sequence_ attribute in ocpTT should become **required**.3.3Deleted UserDeleted Userhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/520Consistently add sequenceNumber attributes to collection items2023-12-04T09:56:28+01:00TT CoordinationConsistently add sequenceNumber attributes to collection itemsDuring the 44th railML conference a poll was done among the audience that showed that introducing a sequenceNumber attribute to collection items that should be ordered was requested by a majority of the participants.
It would need to be...During the 44th railML conference a poll was done among the audience that showed that introducing a sequenceNumber attribute to collection items that should be ordered was requested by a majority of the participants.
It would need to be discussed if renaming existing ones for the sake of consistency is indicated.3.3CO CoordinationCO Coordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/issues/387Update Simple Example to Version 3.22023-11-28T10:06:37+01:00IS CoordinationUpdate Simple Example to Version 3.2## Description
The following issues have been found so far:
* The switch "69W04" is located on netElement "ne_b02". It "functions" as switch (with choice of way) for trains that pass this netElement in reverse direction. Therefore, **a...## Description
The following issues have been found so far:
* The switch "69W04" is located on netElement "ne_b02". It "functions" as switch (with choice of way) for trains that pass this netElement in reverse direction. Therefore, **applicationDirection of the switch element "69W04" need to be corrected from "normal" to "reverse"**.
* The switches "69W03" and "60W04" have linear coordinates given in kilometer values ("4.500"). The used linearPositioningSystem defines the units to be meters. Therefore, **the location measure values of switches "69W03" and "69W04" need to be corrected from km to m ("4.500" --> "4500.0").**
### Background
Simple Example can be downloaded from railML Website: [https://www.railml.org/en/user/exampledata.html]
### Links
* Forum discussion
* Peter Vancsa, 26.06.2020: [https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=738&start=0&]
* Trac tickets
* Wiki documentation
## Proposed solution
Attribute @applicationDirection of the switch element "69W04" need to be corrected from "normal" to "reverse" in Simple Example railML 3.1 export file.
Attribute @measure of the switch element "69W03" need to be corrected from "4.500" to "4500.0". Attribute @measure of the switch element "69W04" need to be corrected from "4.550" to "4550.0".3.2CoordinationCoordinationhttps://development.railml.org/railml/railtopomodel/-/issues/12Redundancy of RTM_UnorderedCollection and RTM_ElementPartCollection should be...2023-11-15T12:12:59+01:00CO OntologyRedundancy of RTM_UnorderedCollection and RTM_ElementPartCollection should be eliminatedCurrently elementCollectionUnordered is an RTM_ElementPartCollection.
Ontologically "isA" is a relation "subClassOf". This means that:
- the set of RTM_ElementPartCollection should be bigger than elementCollectionUnordered because of s...Currently elementCollectionUnordered is an RTM_ElementPartCollection.
Ontologically "isA" is a relation "subClassOf". This means that:
- the set of RTM_ElementPartCollection should be bigger than elementCollectionUnordered because of some classification criteria.
- instances of elementCollectionUnordered should have some additional property to the instances RTM_ElementPartCollection.
- the difference between sets of RTM_ElementPartCollection and elementCollectionUnordered should be bigger than the empty set. Currently, the difference of sets is empty.
RTM_ElementPartCollection minus elementCollectionUnordered equals an empty set.
According to this reasoning elementCollectionUnordered (RTM_UnorderedCollection) is redundant to RTM_ElementPartCollection.