Search results

the track using absPos. epsgCode is highly recommended (mandatory for a future release) if there are coordinates given in the attribute coord (i. e. if

misses a lot of additional attributes/information or it should be moved to a future interlocking schema. Perhaps both. Not yet described. / Noch nicht beschrieben

This category lists pages that employ Template:Future.

correct data when engineering signalling systems. JBV would like in the future to use this RailML scheme for engineering of conventional signalling and

model of today and different future scenarios. Today’s infrastructure is pulled from an asset management database. Future infrastructure is designed by

describe obsolete versions (that are not any longer supported), nor describe future features. The discussion pages are designated for issues about this wiki

topology Infrastructure data has to be valid for the time period (in the future) of the timetable horizon. Details: for conflict detection on micro-level

profile3 (tilt) 40,50,70 0-300 (in 5 km/h steps, 300 km/h can be extended in future) Gradients Gradient 2 ‰ 0-55‰ today, 0-35‰ for new lines, operational only

restrictions (ESRs) Locations of the following may also be required in the future (TBD): Signal berths id, location Bridges id, location Road crossings id

in this use case is not based on the current infrastructure but an agreed future infrastructure state. It is important that any structure (such as repeating

precalculated, assumed or otherwise fixed run times. These may be included in a future use case RTCO that describes how communication of the results of the calculation

❗ (available in railML® 2.2, but physically wrong; will be fixed in future version, see #254)

vehicles and formations) Long term planning (starting typically 1..5 years in future with a duration of typically 3..15 years) Used elements (extract - more

2.0) and is only kept for compatibility reasons. It will be removed in a future version of railML®. Please do not use branchDist anymore in your implementations

railML. In further discussions, the problem has been generalised to: In a future railML version, there may be three (or more) mileages per track: The relative

by the data (focus)? Long term planning (starting typically 1..5 years in future with a duration of typically 3..15 years) Which specific timetable data

to be understood and used as square metres. This issue will be fixed in a future railML version.</xs:documentation> + </xs:annotation> + </xs:attribute>

"macroscopic" and "microscopic". So, possibly we should use that therms in future for the length of the tracks and leave the "macroscopic" and "microscopic"

to be understood and used as square metres. This issue will be fixed in a future railML version.</xs:documentation> </xs:annotation> </xs:attribute> - <xs:attribute