Should PassengerCarryingRequirementsView be a DataManagedObjectView/DerivedView?

[skinkie]

https://github.com/NeTEx-CEN/NeTEx/blob/master/xsd/netex_framework/netex_reusableComponents/netex_vehicleType_version.xsd#L668

[ue71603]

I think it would be good to have a cleaner hierarchy here.

[Aurige]

To me, PassengerCarryingRequirementsView should have substitutionGroup="DerivedView"
(the PassengerCarryingPassengerCarrying_ViewStructure has DerivedViewStructure as a base)

[ue71603]

@Aurige can you do this one?

[nick-knowles]

I'm agnostic on this - perhaps calling a view a view is sufficient to identify it as a view, or should we formally make views substitutable subtypes of derived views? since views are all fof different things they dont really have common aspects other than a reference to the persistent element over which they provide a view

Another issue is concerns the ids of views. Doviews (a) always have an id?(b) is the id codespace the view's own unique id codespace , or is it the same as that of the source of a derived element ? (d) do we specify a constraint to enforce uniqueness?

It is probably useful to allow an id, so implentors who have actually implemented persistent entities corresponding to the view (e,g, CALLs ) , can make a round trip exchange.

[skinkie]

I'm agnostic on this - perhaps calling a view a view is sufficient to identify it as a view, or should we formally make views substitutable subtypes of derived views? since views are all fof different things they dont really have common aspects other than a reference to the persistent element over which they provide a view

If you would be willing to support such change, I would be happy to help. It would make things more clear once parsing them.

[ue71603]

@skinkie Can you formulate the PR then?