Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

First doc review by ERTMS Solutions #3

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

stanpinteTheSignallingCompany
Copy link
Member

Dear Sylvain,

please find attached my first change proposal, following an internal review of the doc.

feel free to contact me to discuss any of these changes.

Very kind regards

Stan

@MERCEmentre
Copy link
Contributor

@sbaro @stanpinte Regarding Optional / Mandatory requirements, I agree with Sylvain: we should focus on minimal mandatory requirements, i.e. bullet 3/ in Sylvain's description.


The output of this goal is a formal specification, understandable by many tools (SCADE,
Simulink, B tools, OpenETCS tool chain…) that can be given to all railway actors, and
The output of this goal is a formal specification that can be given to all railway actors, and
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe "understandable" should be replaced by "translatable", but the feature is useful to have. It is coherent to the response you made to David on the fact that if we use a DSL, it could be used to produce C, Ada, Matlab, Scade...

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree this is very useful, with "translatable". --> That forces the formal model to have open interfaces, so that it can be transformed to other formats.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants