Skip to content

Creection_Bug_AccessEquipment#293

Merged
skinkie merged 4 commits intoTransmodelEcosystem:masterfrom
ue71603:Correction_Bug_AccessEquipment
Apr 13, 2022
Merged

Creection_Bug_AccessEquipment#293
skinkie merged 4 commits intoTransmodelEcosystem:masterfrom
ue71603:Correction_Bug_AccessEquipment

Conversation

@ue71603
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ue71603 ue71603 commented Feb 7, 2022

Christophe: It took me forever to understand what as happening with placeEquipments. I finally solved the issue this way

<xsd:simpleType name="AccessEquipmentIdType">
xsd:annotation
xsd:documentationType for identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
</xsd:annotation>
<xsd:restriction base="InstalledEquipmentIdType"/>
</xsd:simpleType>

<xsd:element name="AccessEquipmentRef" type="AccessEquipmentRefStructure" abstract="true" substitutionGroup="InstalledEquipmentRef">
	<xsd:annotation>
		<xsd:documentation>Identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
	</xsd:annotation>
</xsd:element>
<xsd:complexType name="AccessEquipmentRefStructure">
	<xsd:annotation>
		<xsd:documentation>Type for a reference to an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
	</xsd:annotation>
	<xsd:simpleContent>
		<xsd:restriction base="InstalledEquipmentRefStructure">
			<xsd:attribute name="ref" type="AccessEquipmentIdType" use="required">
				<xsd:annotation>
					<xsd:documentation>Identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
				</xsd:annotation>
			</xsd:attribute>
		</xsd:restriction>
	</xsd:simpleContent>
</xsd:complexType>

It solves the issue.... but this may have some side effect also, can you check how it looks on your side ? We also may need to check if there are other similar issues.
If that's Ok, it can be PRed

Christophe: It took me forever to understand what as happening with placeEquipments. I finally solved the issue this way
	<!-- ==ACCESS EQUIPMENT=================================================== -->
	<xsd:simpleType name="AccessEquipmentIdType">
		<xsd:annotation>
			<xsd:documentation>Type for identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
		</xsd:annotation>
		<xsd:restriction base="InstalledEquipmentIdType"/>
	</xsd:simpleType>
<!--	<xsd:element name="AccessEquipmentRef" type="AccessEquipmentRefStructure" abstract="true" substitutionGroup="EquipmentRef"> [CD] Since AccessEquipment has InstalledEquipment as substitution group we should have InstalledEquipmentRef here -->
	<xsd:element name="AccessEquipmentRef" type="AccessEquipmentRefStructure" abstract="true" substitutionGroup="InstalledEquipmentRef">
		<xsd:annotation>
			<xsd:documentation>Identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
		</xsd:annotation>
	</xsd:element>
	<xsd:complexType name="AccessEquipmentRefStructure">
		<xsd:annotation>
			<xsd:documentation>Type for a reference to an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
		</xsd:annotation>
		<xsd:simpleContent>
<!--		<xsd:restriction base="EquipmentRefStructure"> [CD] Since AccessEquipment has InstalledEquipment as substitution group we should have InstalledEquipmentRef here -->
			<xsd:restriction base="InstalledEquipmentRefStructure">
				<xsd:attribute name="ref" type="AccessEquipmentIdType" use="required">
					<xsd:annotation>
						<xsd:documentation>Identifier of an ACCESS EQUIPMENT.</xsd:documentation>
					</xsd:annotation>
				</xsd:attribute>
			</xsd:restriction>
		</xsd:simpleContent>
	</xsd:complexType>

It solves the issue.... but this may have some side effect also, can you check how it looks on your side ? We also may need to check if there are other similar issues.
If that's Ok, it can be PRed
@ue71603 ue71603 added the bug Technical mistake, inconsistency with the documentation, etc. label Feb 7, 2022
@Aurige
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Aurige commented Feb 7, 2022

Thanks Matthias,
since Travis says it works for the new example and the old ones, I think it is Ok (I'm of course Ok with the proposal, I was mainly fearing possible unexpected side effects)

* CheckConstraint not used
* placeEuipment example adapted
@ue71603
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ue71603 commented Feb 12, 2022

The relevant part of the change was commented out. Now it works... Also added a lot of things from chapter 7 EPIAP so that it is in an example.

There are fields that are commented, due to the fact that they are in next and not master.
@ue71603
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ue71603 commented Apr 12, 2022

@skinkie @duexw : review?

@Aurige
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Aurige commented Apr 12, 2022

long work, little gain with risks of mistakes ... not really tempted on my side ;-)

@skinkie
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

skinkie commented Apr 12, 2022

long work, little gain with risks of mistakes ... not really tempted on my side ;-)

The code generation would really benefit from it. (the remove sequences part)

@ue71603
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ue71603 commented Apr 12, 2022

...and it is necessary for EPIAP....

@skinkie skinkie merged commit 616c8fd into TransmodelEcosystem:master Apr 13, 2022
@ue71603 ue71603 mentioned this pull request Apr 14, 2022
erlendnils1 pushed a commit to entur/NeTEx that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2023
* Creection_Bug_AccessEquipment

There are fields that are commented, due to the fact that they are in next and not master.

Co-authored-by: Stefan de Konink <stefan@konink.de>
erlendnils1 pushed a commit to entur/NeTEx that referenced this pull request Oct 31, 2023
* Creection_Bug_AccessEquipment

There are fields that are commented, due to the fact that they are in next and not master.

Co-authored-by: Stefan de Konink <stefan@konink.de>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Technical mistake, inconsistency with the documentation, etc.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants