You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
From the few predefined attributes of "CityObjects", the attribute "trafficDirection" defined for "_AbstractTransportationWay" is also defined in CityGML 3.0 for AbstractTransportationSpace. Both are defined as enum but the allowed values do not match: In CityJSON 1.1, one may use "one-way" and "two-way" whereas the values are restricted to forwards, backwards and both in CityGML 3.0.
It would be great to harmonize the allowed values in order to make data conversions easier. Maybe by simply adding the CityGML values to the enum in CityJSON?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I had forgotten about that property, I guess in the spirit of CityJSON v1.1 I should just remove it, no?
You wrote "From the few predefined attributes of "CityObjects"", but if I am not mistaken this is the only one (except the "location" for the position of the entrance door). Am I missing something?
So either (1) remove the enum, or (2) add the v3 ones to the list. I would vote for (1) personally, you?
From the few predefined attributes of
"CityObjects"
, the attribute"trafficDirection"
defined for"_AbstractTransportationWay"
is also defined in CityGML 3.0 forAbstractTransportationSpace
. Both are defined asenum
but the allowed values do not match: In CityJSON 1.1, one may use"one-way"
and"two-way"
whereas the values are restricted toforwards
,backwards
andboth
in CityGML 3.0.It would be great to harmonize the allowed values in order to make data conversions easier. Maybe by simply adding the CityGML values to the enum in CityJSON?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: