This mailing list has been migrated to Mailman 3. This archive will no longer be updated. Messages after 1 February 2020 are missing. Please use the new archive instead.
Diese Mailingliste wurde auf Mailman 3 umgestellt. Dieses Archiv wird nicht mehr länger aktualisiert. Nachrichten nach dem 1. Februar 2020 fehlen. Bitte benutze das neue Archiv.
Proposal for new tagging scheme for Ks signals A. Problem Today there are 3 different signal "types" for tagging: - distant - main - combined signals. The only participant in train protection are main and combined signals. Distant signals do not manage the movement authority. They "just" announce the state of the following main aspect signal. Combined signals are no special "type" of signal, they just be "intelligent" with showing the signal states. That means, the aspects of signals can show the following: - main: Hp0, Ks1 - distant: Ks1, Ks2 When combining two aspects, some states are suppressed: Main + Distant = Shown state Hp0 + Ks1 = Hp0 Hp0 + Ks2 = Hp0 Ks1 + Ks1 = Ks1 Ks1 + Ks2 = Ks2 B. Solution It would be much more logical to map both aspects, main and distant, at one node. Advantages: - When not knowing whether a signal is main or combined, it stays flexible to change it later. Nowadays, you have to delete all "combined" tags and make "main" tags an vice versa - No need to have 2 (main + combined) namespaces with all the properties of signals - No need to maintain 2 JOSM preset items - Possibility to filter all main aspect signals, no matter whether they are "combined" signals or "normal" main signals To tag the states I propose to tag a main aspect signal: railway:signal:main=DE-ESO:ks That makes a signal identified as Ks signal, no matter of the states railway:signal:main:states=DE-ESO:hp0 That is what every main aspect signal can show Optional: railway:signal:main:states=DE-ESO:hp0,DE-ESO:ks1 Every distant signal can show DE-ESO:ks2 There is no need to tag this. If a distant signal can also show ks1, tag: railway:signal:distant:states=DE-ESO:ks1,DE-ESO:ks2 There are signals before a buffer stop that can only show Hp0 and Ks2. They would be tagged as follows: railway:signal:main=DE-ESO:ks railway:signal:main:states=DE-ESO:hp0 railway:signal:distant=DE-ESO:ks railway:signal:distant:states=DE-ESO:ks2 A marker light should not be tagged as "DE-ESO:kennlicht", as it is not clear if it is a property of main or distant aspect. I propose to go back to the past with: railway:signal:marker_light=yes That neutral to main or distant. The minor signal should distinguish between Ra 12 (DV) and Sh 1 (DS). I propose to tag: railway:signal:minor=DE-ESO:ds:sh1 or railway:signal:minor=DE-ESO:dv:ra12 Use ds and dv namespace instead of db and dr, as DB and DR no longer exists, DV and DS are the official abbreviations used by DBAG. When tagging signals that are harmonized in DS and DV = Ril301, DO NOT tag this. Zs6 (Gegengleisanzeiger): railway:signal:wrong_road=DE-ESO:zs6 Specify form: railway:signal:wrong_road:form=sign railway:signal:wrong_road:form=light A light can also be Zs8. NO SPECIAL TAGGING, as it is not needed. Every Zs6 can technically show Zs8. If the signal box can't do it, there is no need to tag this at the signal. Zs7 (Vorsichtsignal): railway:signal:main:substitute_signal=DE-ESO:zs7 Tagging of the signal ref: Distinguish between ESTW-Kennzahl and signal ref. 16P3 = 16 + P3 ref:kennzahl=16 ref=P3 That makes it possible to show only the P3 in special applications. When one needs the 16 he can take it from ref:kennzahl. Zs3/Zs3v: Switch over to railway:signal:speed_signal Advantage: Possibility to tag a Lf7 at the same position railway:signal:speed_signal=DE-ESO:zs3 railway:signal:speed_signal:speed=60 railway:signal:speed_signal:form=sign/light (default: sign) As signals have positions, meaning a km (example: km 18.543) the tag railway:signal:position=18.543 should be used. The "Standort" should be tagged as railway:signal:location=left/right/bridge The direction should be tagged as railway:signal:direction=nominal/reverse regarding to the OSM way. I know that at least Nakaner will be against ALL my ideas. But that is no matter for me, as long as he has no real arguments beside of saying that the ideas are "from me". Greets PeterDRS