Talk:UC:IL:UseCases

Prioritization and Communication of IL uses cases

I propose to edit the use cases sorted as validated priorities That is (to be discussed and approbed before publishing): (below a trial as chart, and further below the original text version enriched

Priority	Description (EN)	Description (DE)	Status
1	Data prepration for interlocking	Datenbereitstellung für Stellwerkssysteme	ongoing
2	Interlocking engineering for signalling	Stellwerkstechnik für Signalisierung	tbc
3	Interlocking engineering	Stellwerksprojektierung	tbc
4	Example	Example	Example
5	Example	Example	Example
6	Example	Example	Example
tbd	Example	Example	Example
tbd	Example	Example	Example
tbd	Example	Example	Example
tbd	Example	Example	Example

I propose to edit the use cases sorted as validated priorities

That is (to be discussed and approbed before publishing):

The following list provides links to the use cases related with interlocking:

• Data prepration for interlocking; Datenbereitstellung für Stellwerkssysteme (reported by EULYNX project)
• Interlocking engineering for signalling; Stellwerkstechnik für Signalisierung (reported by Jernbaneverket, Norway)
• Interlocking engineering; Stellwerksprojektierung
• Simulation; Simulation

• Operation and Control; Betriebsführung
• Hardware and cable plan; Aussenanlage und Kabelplan
• Site preparation data for Signal Controlled Warning Systems (SCWS); Daten zur Standortvorbereitung für Rottenwarnsysteme

--Alain Jeanmaire (talk) 12:57, 29 August 2016 (CEST)

I suggest to add a column with the reporter of the use case (EULYNX, Jernbaneverket, ...) and a column with the status of the use case (draft, discussed, consolidated, implemented, revised, ...). --Vasco Paul Kolmorgen (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2016 (CEST)

Agreed during the IL developers conference call that this table shall be extended with an abbreviation column and used from now for priorisation and status follow up. --Coordination (talk) 15:12, 6 September 2016 (CEST)

I am going to make this list. As to avoid misunderstandings, I would like to ask you for some clarifications.

• Did I understand you properly, that this change relates to the list of use cases — or does it affect the use case articles themselves? (e.g.: should the abbreviation and the status be integrated into the individual use case articles?)
• Which kind of prioritization will be implemented? I'll have to explain the criterion to the readers of the page ...

Thank you in advance for your answers.
I would appreciate your participation in the discussion on the documentation of railML^®3, as the decisions made in this matter will affect all of us — see here (link to the railML^® website).
Yours, Ferri Leberl (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2016 (CEST)