Skip to content

Adding attribute on Entity for publication meta-information (e.g. for public, or restricted dataset-filtering purposes) - #899

Open
JohanEntur wants to merge 3 commits into
TransmodelEcosystem:v2.1-wipfrom
entur:publication_enum_for_entity
Open

Adding attribute on Entity for publication meta-information (e.g. for public, or restricted dataset-filtering purposes)#899
JohanEntur wants to merge 3 commits into
TransmodelEcosystem:v2.1-wipfrom
entur:publication_enum_for_entity

Conversation

@JohanEntur

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Once more I am clicking buttons on behalf of Entur.
This was created ages ago by people in Entur but it was never merged up to CEN.

Comment threadxsd/netex_framework/netex_responsibility/netex_version_support.xsd Outdated
@skinkie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Is "future use" something that is in scope or out scope, because for example a ValidityBetween should have been provided.

@JohanEntur

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

where are you quoting from?

@skinkie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

where are you quoting from?

The ideas in my mind after reviewing this addition.

@JohanEntur

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

aha well. yes and no. our customers keep requesting "send file import later"-features so that they are able to sync their real-time systems (which have a much slower turnover than our import), but.... I dont know. As you say, it could be a validty date too but it requires so much from the various system to a) know about the value b) know what it means c) implement logic for it. I dont think the world is ready for such advanced syncronized data activation.

But, maybe this is not the usecase you were thinking of.

@skinkie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My use case is basically, there will be renovated station in the future. But obviously the planned state is available. I think people are interested in knowing what the station looks like in the future.

@JohanEntur

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

so its a stopplace with versions

@ue71603ue71603 added enhancement non semantic enhacement: technical enhancement, etc. group_decision_needed Must be discussed during a CEN TC278 WG3 SG9 plenary labels May 21, 2025
<xsd:documentation>Whether ENTITY is currently in use. Default is "active".</xsd:documentation>
</xsd:annotation>
</xsd:attribute>
<xsd:attribute name="publication" type="PublicationEnumeration" use="optional" default="public">

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggestions for a more precise name: publicationSharingPolicy, publicationVisibility

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We would prefer to stick to "publication" for concision. This does not seem to collide or cause ambiguity with other existing attributes.

@AurigeAurige added the needs documentation update The NeTEx document needs to be updated label May 21, 2025
@AurigeAurige modified the milestones: netex_2.0, netex_2.1May 21, 2025
syversenkrand others added 2 commits April 14, 2026 11:35
@vpaturet
vpaturetforce-pushed the publication_enum_for_entity branch from d0abfc4 to b237693CompareApril 14, 2026 09:37
@vpaturet

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@skinkie We are refreshing this PR, could you change the target branch from v2.0 to v2.1-wip?
(This requires write access, I cannot do it)

@vpaturet

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My use case is basically, there will be renovated station in the future. But obviously the planned state is available. I think people are interested in knowing what the station looks like in the future.

As Johan said, this feature is orthogonal to validity period or future state. It is about the audience (is this entity intended to be communicated to the public or is it internal?)

@skinkie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vpaturet@JohanEntur I don't have the permissions to change your target branch.

@TuThoThai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vpaturet@JohanEntur I don't have the permissions to change your target branch.

@skinkie, @vpaturet, @JohanEntur, since the PR is based on a fork of the repo in another organisation (Entur), I cannot change the target either.
Only solution is to redo the PR using a feature branch in this repo, based on branch v2.1-wip

I will look at it later for the redo.

@skinkie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vpaturet@JohanEntur I don't have the permissions to change your target branch.

@skinkie, @vpaturet, @JohanEntur, since the PR is based on a fork of the repo in another organisation (Entur), I cannot change the target either. Only solution is to redo the PR using a feature branch in this repo, based on branch v2.1-wip

I will look at it later for the redo.

Just let Johan do the work, single click.

@JohanEntur
JohanEntur changed the base branch from v2.0 to v2.1-wipMay 18, 2026 14:28
@vpaturet

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@skinkie@TuThoThai Thanks, we managed to change the target branch and update the PR.

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancementnon semantic enhacement: technical enhancement, etc.group_decision_neededMust be discussed during a CEN TC278 WG3 SG9 plenaryneeds documentation updateThe NeTEx document needs to be updated

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@JohanEntur@skinkie@vpaturet@TuThoThai@ue71603@trurlurl@Aurige@syversenkr