Second Life Wiki - User contributions [en]

User talk:Anaimfinity Resident

2013-12-23T19:19:58Z

Vaughn Deluca:

I like the idea of naming and adding these continents and oceans - makes the world seem more complete. If I see any others or have any ideas for names I will pass them on to you
[[User:Hitomi Tiponi|Hitomi Tiponi]] 07:46, 3 September 2013 (PDT)

I finished what I had to write. Now, feel free to modify and add your names. Everybody can, that's why I put this article into mainspace and not into residentspace. Our world NEEDS some Geography.

I just wanted to stop by and say to keep up the good work. -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' ([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]]) 16:00, 29 November 2013 (PST)

Indeed, wonderful work!
[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 11:19, 23 December 2013 (PST)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2012-05-31T13:40:25Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* removed outdated discussion */

{{Talk}}
If you feel that the information about the SLRR standards are not correct or the text needs correction then please feel free to start a discussion on this page

----
===control system discussion===
Original text:
'''''Control'''''
''is the way the rail network as a whole works safely while sharing the rail resources among consists.'' 
Currently (10-2009) there is no such system in place.

;Problem description:
:If rolling stock of multiple operators is allowed on a track, ''traffic control'' will be necessary. The block section type of control system should work, using llSay on a negative channel, phantom alpha detectors on the track, and signals for realism.
:A larger problem is what to do about traffic in the opposite direction. Block Section control could work with a passing siding for each section. Which leads to...
:Another problem - switches. If the Guide rail is used, then it could be turned and moved to divert a train, or line and branch Guides could be alternated between phantom and nonphysical as determined by routing. If a flat or phantom guide rail is used, names can be switched to change which rail is active.

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 14:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

 
 

;SCADAD controll system:

The Virtual Railway Consortium (VRC) is developing an open specification for a generalised control system (SCADAD, Supervisory Control, Data Acquisition & Distribution) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds. Here an overview of the SCADAD protocol is presented. All comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. Interested scripters are invited to contact Moundsa Mayo or Vaughn Deluca.

Currently two implementations are deployed inworld. Along the GSLR a (slightly older) version of the systems communication backbone is running over 7 sims, but no equipment is connected as yet. In the Huckelberry yard, communication between several switches and status maps are tested and the main development is taking place there. A new implementation is planned in Tuliptree.

--General design considerations and requirements

(1) The system must operate fully in-world, i.e. independent off external servers for communication.
 
(2) The system must be as much as possible distributed, i.e. the objects in the system should be able to function independent and autonomous (possibly at a reduced level of functionality). If one entity fails, the remaining entities use sensible defaults to keep up a reasonable level of functionality. This results in graceful degradation of the system when communication starts to fail.
 
(3)The system must be modular and as much as possible self-configuring to allow easy extension with new objects, and provide both efficient and user friendly operation.
 
-- System overview

At the highest level the system can be viewed as a set of objects that exchange protocol messages.
Examples are switches, stations, control towers and message relays. The protocol makes no assumptions about the inner workings of the object. Any object that follows the protocol will be able to communicate. This will allow railway line operators that have developed their own communication systems to use the VRC protocol in addition to their own system and interface it with their local protocols and existing builds simply by dropping some scripts in the object.

The structure of the system is a "vertical" chain of command in which each object knows about nodes lower in the system, and knows the address of one parent object to which messages are forwarded that the object can not handle itself. The chain branches out at the bottom to structures like switches and automated rolling stock, and finally to elements of structures like signals and train detectors. In addition there are "horizontal" connections to allow inter-region communication.

Request messages can be injected at each level. Routing of messages to neighboring regions is done by region controllers that (currently) communicate to pairs of repeaters whispering over region boundaries, but HTTP connections are equally possible. The region controller uses a local routing table to determine in what direction a message that is not addressed to its own region should be forwarded.

These two main "dimensions" in the network (vertical within region, and horizontal between regions) are intersecting at the the region controllers (one per region) that function as routers for messages for objects not present in the region. In each region the region controller talks to one or more downstream control towers, typically managed by parcel owners. The lower parts of the system (switches, stations etc) are also owned and operated by the parcel owner. The region controllers together build a communication "backbone", a shared public network operated by the members of the VRC or equivalent organisation, at a best effort basis. Traveling rolling stock may contact the region controller to request information about the local infrastructure (switches, stations, etc., and in most cases will receive the address of a local tower for further communication.

The chosen design of addressable objects has the advantages that it can be fully in-world (requirement 1), that there is no central point of control, so the system will degrade gracefully (requirement 2) and individual units can be relatively easy added or changed (requirement 3). The drawback is more complexity of the system as a whole, compared to a system where each entity communicates directly with a central hub like an out-of-world server. The biggest advantage is however that the system fits well to the relative fluid nature of SL were parcel owners come and go. The general approach can be compared to the internet, that is not "owned" by anybody and allows every interested party to connect and exchange information using a standard protocol.

-- Message template

All messages that are passed to the different objects in the network have the same format: a set of 16 main fields that together define the message. All 16 fields are always present in each message.
The fields can be individually read from the message using an index into the message.
The destination region of the message is for instance stored in the string at position 3.

<pre>
// =====================================================================
// VRC SCADAD message template v4
// =====================================================================
// Message template fields
//
// integer MSG_INFO = 0; index of message info
// integer MSG_SEQUENCE = 1; index of sequence number
// integer MSG_DEST = 2; index of global part destination
// integer MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME = 3; index of destination region
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE = 4; index of destination structure class
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC = 5; index of destination structure location
// integer MSG_DEST_ELEMENT = 6; index of sub-structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER = 7; index of global part sender
// integer MSG_SENDER_REGIONNAME = 8; index of sender region
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUCTURE = 9; index of sender structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUC_LOC = 10; index of sender location
// integer MSG_SENDER_ELEMENT = 11; index of sender sub-structure class
// integer MSG_COMMAND = 12; index of command word
// integer MSG_CONTENT_INT = 13; index of payload integer
// integer MSG_CONTENT_FLOAT = 14; index of payload float
// integer MSG_CONTENT_STRING = 15; index of payload string
//integer MSG_CONTENT_KEY = 16; index of payload key
</pre>
Most of the 16 main fields in the template are divided into subfields to make more efficient use of space. The message destination field (MSG_DEST) at position 2 for instance has subfields for "world", "organisation" and "service" constants.

-- Address logic

Communicating objects need a way to address each other. In the SCADAD system each node can send out requests and respond to requests. The destination and origin of a message are specified by building the unique address of the destination from information in the message. See examplem below: words in capitals are predefined constants, CONN_BRANCH indicates for instance the branch side from a Y switch.
<pre>
Field Content Example values
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MSG_DEST World, Organisation, Service SL, VRC, VRC_TEST
MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME RegionName Huckleberry
MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE ObjectType STRUC_SWITCH
MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC x, y, z 132,6,85
MSG_DEST_ELEMENT Element, ElementID ELEM_SIGNAL, CONN_BRANCH
</pre>

The full and unique name of this object (one of the signals of a switch) could be:
SL.VRC.VRC_TEST.Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85.Signal.Branch.
In most cases the first 3 fields of the address (world, organisation, service) will be implied (i.e. used as default), and the last two will be only used by the switch itself. Therefore, to communicate with the switch described above the partial address Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85 will be all that is needed for local communiciation.

Note that to control a switch, a request will be send containing the new position. The switch will acknowlege by sending its new position. The switch will take care of adjusting its own element, like signals lights in a consistent manner.
Objects automatically determine their own address (Using configuration info from the description field or from a configuration notecard). Each object has a parent object, for forwarding messages that can't be handled by the object itself.

Update December 21, 2011: 
Here is an example how the system can be used: In a rail yard, the signal hut (or control tower) can contain a map with all signals in the yard. When a switches is flipped by running trains, the switch sends a status message message to its parent structure (the tower), and the tower forwards this to the map(s) it controls that displays the new status. A human user can touch buttons or pull levers in the tower, and those objects will send messages to the switch they are associated with. The switch responds by changing position and sending a message back to the tower with the new state of the switch. The above described functionality is currently up and running in Huckleberry, but the scripts still need a lot of work. All volunteers are welcome.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 12:35, 19 December 2011 (PST)

Second Life Railroad

2012-05-31T13:32:21Z

Vaughn Deluca: /*removed outdated paragraph that no longer provides usefull info */

{{Help
|Avatar=
|Object=
|LandSim=
|Viewer=
|Community=*
|Communication=
|Multimedia=
|Navigation=
|Wiki=
|Glossary=*
|Misc=*
|BugFixes=
|Disclaimer=
|OldInfo=
}}

{|style="width: 100%; font-size: 100%; background: #ffffff; border:1px solid #c0c0c0;"
| align="left"|This page was modified {{Age|20|10|2010}} days ago__TOC__
| <div align="center">
[[Image:SLRR_wikilogo.png|400px|center]]
</div>
|}
 
<div id="box">

==Description==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
This article is a description of the Second Life Railroad ( [[Acronyms|SLRR]] ) on the Heterocera Atoll continent.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==SLRR==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
The Second Life Railroad ( [[Acronyms|SLRR]] ) runs over more then 80 Regions on the Heterocera Atoll (Northern) Continent. More than 20 Regions have branch lines extended out from the Heterocera Main line. Branch lines include the Maritime Line, the North Coast Line, the Mountain Line and the North Line. Track-laying and maintenance are provided by Michael Linden and the Linden Department of Public works [[LDPW]].

The long distances covered by the SLRR Atoll railroad tracks make them a unique feature in Second Life. Residents can operate trains on the SLRR and [[#Other Railway initiatives|other railroads]], much as anyone can operate a car on the roads in Second Life. Any Resident may use this public facility for any purpose consistent with the Second Life Community Standards/TOS. There are a series of official Linden [[#SLRR Stations|stations]] along the SLRR, and at times, Linden Labs has provided automated rail service.

There are many train builders in SL that make a wide variety of trains using several different methods for locomotion. The current SLRR track standards support all types of trains. Thousands of residents own personal trains. Standards for [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards#Guidance|guidance]], [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards#Gage|track]] and [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_Switch|SLRR Switches]] have enabled residents to develop suitable vehicles. Using the SLRR with its current standard is simple to understand and accessible to Residents and builders of all skill levels.

During one of the LDPW [[Office_hours]] at the beginning of 2010 Michael Linden has made the following public statements, summarized here:

* The SLRR track specifications will not change anytime soon.
* Signals will be installed but we will not be punished for example for "running red light signals".
* Switches will be installed connecting the various branch lines to the main line.
* Automated trains will not be put into regular service by the LDPW, if the residents keep using the SLRR with their private trains.
* Residents may choose to run automated trains, consistent with the ToS.
* Residents may make a request to the LDPW to connect their private track on the Atoll to the SLRR track via a switch.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==History==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
The SLRR dates back to 2005 when Linden Lab created these railroad tracks. On the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History | SLRR history]] page you can find out more how railroad became what it is to date.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==SLRR Stations==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
Stations with a number are official Linden Lab SLRR station. Stations marked without a number are publicly accessible Resident build locations along the SLRR related to the rail system. Residents are encouraged to add their own railway station to this public list.

Note: You may need to refresh your browser to get the latest image updates to show up.

[[Image:SLRR_System_Map.jpg|500px|right]]
[[File:SLRR_map.png|500px|thumb|right|A Second Life Railroad reference map (creator: Stryker Jenkins / VRC)]]
[[File:SLRR_Long_Map.png|500px|thumb|right|SLRR map by Michael Linden / Myopic Mole - LDPW]]
[[File:SLRR_EN.png|500px|thumb|right|Schematic railway map focused on the SLRR, along with the uncompleted WARR and GSLR.]]

{| style="width:40%"
! align="left" colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=red|back_color=red|text=--- |}} '''Heterocera Main line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Tuliptree to Bhaga
|-
| '''1''' || {{SLurl|region=Tuliptree|x=152|y=155|z=31|title=Tuliptree Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4752410997_a7e278f9b8_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Tuliptree|x=96|y=142|z=30|title=VRC HQ Tuliptree|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4753052208_5b79a4e0a0_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Cecropia|x=99|y=66|z=25|title=GSLR Cecropia Ocean Terminal}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Calleta|x=133|y=19|z=31|title=Train & Rail Museum|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4753052720_d3df31294c_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''2''' || {{SLurl|region=Calleta|x=185|y=179|z=30|title=Calleta "Hobo" Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4123/4752411511_a16c67fc3b_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Calleta|x=98|y=214|z=27|title=Calleta's Hobo Railroad Infohub}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Lebeau|x=38|y=25|z=33|title=LIONHEART Estate Info Center}}
|-
| '''3''' || {{SLurl|region=Neumoegen|x=107|y=142|z=65|title=Neumoegen Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4095/4753053638_4a3de74973_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''4''' || {{SLurl|region=Achemon|x=214|y=123|z=70|title=Achemon Station||image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4752413481_5075d296c3_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Achemon|x=29|y=240|z=81|title=VRC Achemon Trainspotting Gallery||image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4753054524_2c3c44779a_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''5''' || {{SLurl|region=Obscure|x=62|y=119|z=81|title=Obscure Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4753054856_ba7c230b38_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''6''' || {{SLurl|region=Epirrhoe|x=171|y=225|z=81|title=Epirrhoe Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4753055516_988abfa54c_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Jubata|x=237|y=238|z=82|title= Jubata Station 2}}
|-
| '''7''' || {{SLurl|region=Jubata|x=195|y=239|z=81|title=Jubata Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4753055862_f7d355b04b_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''8''' || {{SLurl|region=Spini|x=102|y=18|z=81|title=Spini Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4123/4752416097_30e07b8eab_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Athetis|x=215|y=127|z=80|title=VRC Athetis Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4753057260_f2e5df6d04_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Lunalis|x=8|y=77|z=93|title=Around The Atoll info station}}
|-
| '''9''' || {{SLurl|region=Lunalis|x=24|y=71|z=90|title=Lunalis Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4753057482_47d0053d95_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Lapara|x=159|y=67|z=90|title=SLRR Lapara}}
|-
|'''10''' || {{SLurl|region=Foxglove|x=151|y=227|z=90|title=Foxglove Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4136/4752417495_fc5a343e83_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Foxglove|x=190|y=191|z=90|title=VRC Foxglove Stationn}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Taeniatum|x=101|y=179|z=102|title=H8 Motors Express|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4100/4752417783_58f1554b10_m.jpg}}
|-
|'''11''' || {{SLurl|region=Clearwing|x=254|y=36|z=86|title=Clearwing Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4753059006_9a7322977f_m.jpg}}
|-
|'''12''' || {{SLurl|region=Crenulate|x=150|y=26|z=86|title=Crenulate Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4752418351_1672f77ca4_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Pini|x=112|y=102|z=94|title=Pini Rail Yard|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4752418791_955f4e16bc_m.jpg}}
|-
|'''13''' || {{SLurl|region=Aglia|x=144|y=151|z=83|title=Aglia Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4095/4753060038_2b70176a40_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Celerio|x=132|y=235|z=82|title=Celerio Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4753060898_fc1da91747_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Velox|x=17|y=192|z=83|title=VRC Velox Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4901154666_9974f8dee0_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''14''' || {{SLurl|region=Tenera|x=196|y=139|z=83|title=Tenera Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4753060274_3437603cb0_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Crumbi|x=140|y=179|z=55|title=VRC Crumbi Annex|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4113/5098721177_11e053d1d6_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''15''' || {{SLurl|region=Zale|x=73|y=200|z=29|title=Zale Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4752421259_405df1e704_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Bhaga|x=140|y=123|z=29|title=Stenvaag locomotive works}}
|-
| '''16''' || {{SLurl|region=Bhaga|x=108|y=34|z=28|title=Bhaga Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4753062528_ffd9dbd02b_m.jpg}}
|-
| || 
|-
|colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=lime|back_color=lime|text=--- |}} '''Maritime branch line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Crumbi Junction Station to Vicina
|-
| '''20''' || {{SLurl|region=Crumbi|x=28|y=206|z=65|title=Crumbi Junction|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4752420425_d5fcb993f6_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''21''' || {{SLurl|region=Dubia|x=73|y=233|z=61|title=Dubia Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4753063904_dab8ae71a4_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Cycnia|x=107|y=141|z=53|title=VRC Cycnia info station|image=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1255/5099321204_725053b9ee_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''22''' || {{SLurl|region=Vicina|x=133|y=70|z=30|title=Vicina Dock|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4752422181_9eeb2e1994_m.jpg}}
|-
| || 
|-
|colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=orange|back_color=orange|text=--- |}} '''East branch line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Anilis Junction to Catalpa (With extension option to Malacosoma) 
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Anilis|x=181|y=148|z=97|title=VRC Anilis station and Yard}}
|-
| '''30''' || {{SLurl|region=Tersa|x=173|y=41|z=91|title=Tersa Yard SLRR}}
|-
| '''31''' || {{SLurl|region=Poecila Stop|x=185|y=134|z=63|title=Poecila Stop}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Poecila|x=204|y=106|z=64|title=Poecila Station|image=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1255/5099321204_725053b9ee_m.jpg}}
|-
| || 
|-
|colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=Yellow|back_color=Yellow|text=--- |}} '''North Coast branch line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Tenera Station to Spangle 
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Gluphisia|x=128|y=128|z=98|title=Gluphisia Station}}
|-
| '''40''' || {{SLurl|region=Pawpaw|x=148|y=117|z=118|title=Pawpaw Junction|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4097/4753064808_b25cb8023f_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''41''' || {{SLurl|region=Tussock|x=118|y=95|z=118|title=Tussock Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4137/4752424191_d838d64904_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Tussock|x=102|y=173|z=111|title=VRC - Tussock}}
|-
| '''42''' || {{SLurl|region=Malacosoma|x=22|y=223|z=79|title=Malacosoma Crossover|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4094/4752424533_f27b186e25_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Malacosoma|x=15|y=230|z=79|title=VRC Malacosoma Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4141/4752424863_2dcc503424_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''43''' || {{SLurl|region=Melanthia|x=93|y=4|z=31|title=Melanthia Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4752425181_c96c61a07b_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Plusia|x=245|y=127|z=32|title=Radioactive Plusia Railway Station}}
|-
| '''44''' || {{SLurl|region=Spangle|x=161|y=239|z=31|title=Spangle Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4752426831_f911738607_m.jpg}}
|-
| || 
|-
|colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=aqua|back_color=aqua|text=--- |}} '''Mountain branch line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Pawpaw Junction station to Pavonia and Crenulate
|-
| '''50''' || {{SLurl|region=Leafroller|x=203|y=14|z=119|title=Leafroller Station|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4122/4753068250_2349711bc7_m.jpg}}
|-
| '''51''' || {{SLurl|region=Pavonia|x=49|y=122|z=129|title=Pavonia Platform|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4957716554_06decda808_m.jpg}}
|-
| || 
|-
|colspan="2" | {{wFont|size=large|color=pink|back_color=pink|text=--- |}} '''Northern branch line'''
|-
|colspan="2" | From Tussock to Bembecia (With extension option}
|-
| '''60''' || {{SLurl|region=Tussock|x=60|y=115|z=119|title=Tussock Railyard|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4137/4752424191_d838d64904_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Tussock|x=38|y=149|z=121|title=VRC Freightyard|image=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4081/4900565059_b4e617baa5_m.jpg}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Hooktip|x=184|y=169|z=134|title=VRC Grand Central - Hooktip}}
|-
| || {{SLurl|region=Bembecia|x=100|y=60|z=128|title=Bembecia Heights SLRR Rezz Zone}}
|}
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Other Railway initiatives==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
There are several other gauge railroads in SL and private group initiatives, some on private land, some on Linden land. 
This is an alphabetic list of some examples. The different systems are not necessarily compatible with SLRR standards.
* [[Bay_City#Bay_City_Harbor_Railway|Bay City Harbor Railway]] - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Inner%20Harbor
|x=20
|y=35
|z=25
|title=Bay City Harbor Railway
}}
*[http://www.steampunkwiki.net/index.php?title=Caledon_National_Rail Caledon National Rail] - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Caledon On Sea
|x=199
|y=177
|z=24
|title=Caledon On Sea Station
}}
*[[GSLR]] - [[GSLR|The Great Second Life Railway]] - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Purple
|x=136
|y=206
|z=26
|title=Purple right of way Station/Dock
}}
*Lackawanna Railroad (New York) - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=SouthernTier New York
|x=204
|y=79
|z=23
|title=Lackawanna Railroad Station
}}
*LHRR - Lionheart Continental Railroad - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Lionheart Pumbaa
|x=179
|y=147
|z=28
|title=LHRR Pumbaa Station
}}
*[http://world.secondlife.com/group/d47adf74-2503-ef83-85fc-b7befa691b56 Loco Motives] multi-region SLRR-gauge layouts
*[[ONSR]] - [[ONSR|Okemo, Nakiska, and Southern Railway]] - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Smithers Bluff
|x=241
|y=25
|z=27
|title=Smithers Bluff Station
}}
* Saminekim Track Loop / *Premium member gift zone - SLURL: {{SLurl
|region=Saminekim
|x=37
|y=71
|z=52
|title=Saminekim Track Loop
}}
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Source==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
The above information was compiled by various SL Residents including Moundsa Mayo, Jer Straaf, Damion Goodman and Dougie Flossberg.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==References==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
Here is a list of Related resources. You can find more information about the SLRR and other Rail related articles on these wiki pages and external websites.

Wiki pages:
* [[Second_Life_Railroad]] (main page)
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History|SLRR History]]
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards|SLRR Standards]]
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR Switch|SLRR Switch]]

* [[LDPW|Linden Department of Public Works]]
* [[Linden_Vehicle_Tutorial]]
* [[Second_Life_Railway_Commission]]
* [[Virtual_Railway_Consortium]]

External information:
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge Wikipedia: Rail gauge]
* [http://lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=physics Physics related LSL on LSLwiki.net]
* [http://lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=vehicles Vehicle related LSL on LSLwiki.net]
* [http://www.virtualrailwayconsortium.org/ Virtual Railway Consortium]
</div></div>

[[Category:SL_Railroad]]
[[Category:LDPW]]

Virtual Railway Consortium

2012-05-31T13:22:35Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Description */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2012-01-03T05:53:14Z

Vaughn Deluca: corrected old version order in address

{{Talk}}
If you feel that the information about the SLRR standards are not correct or the text needs correction then please feel free to start a discussion on this page

----
===control system discussion===
Original text:
'''''Control'''''
''is the way the rail network as a whole works safely while sharing the rail resources among consists.'' 
Currently (10-2009) there is no such system in place.

;Problem description:
:If rolling stock of multiple operators is allowed on a track, ''traffic control'' will be necessary. The block section type of control system should work, using llSay on a negative channel, phantom alpha detectors on the track, and signals for realism.
:A larger problem is what to do about traffic in the opposite direction. Block Section control could work with a passing siding for each section. Which leads to...
:Another problem - switches. If the Guide rail is used, then it could be turned and moved to divert a train, or line and branch Guides could be alternated between phantom and nonphysical as determined by routing. If a flat or phantom guide rail is used, names can be switched to change which rail is active.

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 14:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

...and what if an actual human wants to use the line rather than "controlled" rolling stock? And, why is a VRC meeting being used to dictate such things, the so-called "Community meeting". I do not recall an announcement on the Second Life blog, forums or anywhere else for a community meeting. The community is more than the VRC, which remains a private group. The SLRR is a resource for all residents, not a private group. I see this arrogant disregard for residents outside of the VCR continues, which doesn't surprise me.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 22:21, 12 June 2011 (PDT)
 
:: If an actual human wants to disregard the information that is provided to allow a pleasant and realistic journey, than that human can just do so. I would like to stress once more, that the "control" that we talk about here is not control of the train operator. What is discussed is the control of signals and other information sources. The VRC works to design a standardized and open information exchange system, that can be used by a human operator or by automated trains, but can just as well be ignored if the human operator wishes to do so. 
::The VRC is an open organisation that in no way claims rights over the SLRR nor prescribes or dictates anything to anybody. If you like to join you are welcome, if you don't want to be involved that is fine to. We will not restrict anybody in using the SLRR in the way they want but, we expect that same attitude from others. If you don't like to discuss ways to design a block control system, please don't do it, but stop cluttering the page with claims of restrictions of your rights that have no basis.

::[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 05:11, 17 December 2011 (PST)
 
 

;SCADAD controll system:

The Virtual Railway Consortium (VRC) is developing an open specification for a generalised control system (SCADAD, Supervisory Control, Data Acquisition & Distribution) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds. Here an overview of the SCADAD protocol is presented. All comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. Interested scripters are invited to contact Moundsa Mayo or Vaughn Deluca.

Currently two implementations are deployed inworld. Along the GSLR a (slightly older) version of the systems communication backbone is running over 7 sims, but no equipment is connected as yet. In the Huckelberry yard, communication between several switches and status maps are tested and the main development is taking place there. A new implementation is planned in Tuliptree.

--General design considerations and requirements

(1) The system must operate fully in-world, i.e. independent off external servers for communication.
 
(2) The system must be as much as possible distributed, i.e. the objects in the system should be able to function independent and autonomous (possibly at a reduced level of functionality). If one entity fails, the remaining entities use sensible defaults to keep up a reasonable level of functionality. This results in graceful degradation of the system when communication starts to fail.
 
(3)The system must be modular and as much as possible self-configuring to allow easy extension with new objects, and provide both efficient and user friendly operation.
 
-- System overview

At the highest level the system can be viewed as a set of objects that exchange protocol messages.
Examples are switches, stations, control towers and message relays. The protocol makes no assumptions about the inner workings of the object. Any object that follows the protocol will be able to communicate. This will allow railway line operators that have developed their own communication systems to use the VRC protocol in addition to their own system and interface it with their local protocols and existing builds simply by dropping some scripts in the object.

The structure of the system is a "vertical" chain of command in which each object knows about nodes lower in the system, and knows the address of one parent object to which messages are forwarded that the object can not handle itself. The chain branches out at the bottom to structures like switches and automated rolling stock, and finally to elements of structures like signals and train detectors. In addition there are "horizontal" connections to allow inter-region communication.

Request messages can be injected at each level. Routing of messages to neighboring regions is done by region controllers that (currently) communicate to pairs of repeaters whispering over region boundaries, but HTTP connections are equally possible. The region controller uses a local routing table to determine in what direction a message that is not addressed to its own region should be forwarded.

These two main "dimensions" in the network (vertical within region, and horizontal between regions) are intersecting at the the region controllers (one per region) that function as routers for messages for objects not present in the region. In each region the region controller talks to one or more downstream control towers, typically managed by parcel owners. The lower parts of the system (switches, stations etc) are also owned and operated by the parcel owner. The region controllers together build a communication "backbone", a shared public network operated by the members of the VRC or equivalent organisation, at a best effort basis. Traveling rolling stock may contact the region controller to request information about the local infrastructure (switches, stations, etc., and in most cases will receive the address of a local tower for further communication.

The chosen design of addressable objects has the advantages that it can be fully in-world (requirement 1), that there is no central point of control, so the system will degrade gracefully (requirement 2) and individual units can be relatively easy added or changed (requirement 3). The drawback is more complexity of the system as a whole, compared to a system where each entity communicates directly with a central hub like an out-of-world server. The biggest advantage is however that the system fits well to the relative fluid nature of SL were parcel owners come and go. The general approach can be compared to the internet, that is not "owned" by anybody and allows every interested party to connect and exchange information using a standard protocol.

-- Message template

All messages that are passed to the different objects in the network have the same format: a set of 16 main fields that together define the message. All 16 fields are always present in each message.
The fields can be individually read from the message using an index into the message.
The destination region of the message is for instance stored in the string at position 3.

<pre>
// =====================================================================
// VRC SCADAD message template v4
// =====================================================================
// Message template fields
//
// integer MSG_INFO = 0; index of message info
// integer MSG_SEQUENCE = 1; index of sequence number
// integer MSG_DEST = 2; index of global part destination
// integer MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME = 3; index of destination region
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE = 4; index of destination structure class
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC = 5; index of destination structure location
// integer MSG_DEST_ELEMENT = 6; index of sub-structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER = 7; index of global part sender
// integer MSG_SENDER_REGIONNAME = 8; index of sender region
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUCTURE = 9; index of sender structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUC_LOC = 10; index of sender location
// integer MSG_SENDER_ELEMENT = 11; index of sender sub-structure class
// integer MSG_COMMAND = 12; index of command word
// integer MSG_CONTENT_INT = 13; index of payload integer
// integer MSG_CONTENT_FLOAT = 14; index of payload float
// integer MSG_CONTENT_STRING = 15; index of payload string
//integer MSG_CONTENT_KEY = 16; index of payload key
</pre>
Most of the 16 main fields in the template are divided into subfields to make more efficient use of space. The message destination field (MSG_DEST) at position 2 for instance has subfields for "world", "organisation" and "service" constants.

-- Address logic

Communicating objects need a way to address each other. In the SCADAD system each node can send out requests and respond to requests. The destination and origin of a message are specified by building the unique address of the destination from information in the message. See examplem below: words in capitals are predefined constants, CONN_BRANCH indicates for instance the branch side from a Y switch.
<pre>
Field Content Example values
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MSG_DEST World, Organisation, Service SL, VRC, VRC_TEST
MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME RegionName Huckleberry
MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE ObjectType STRUC_SWITCH
MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC x, y, z 132,6,85
MSG_DEST_ELEMENT Element, ElementID ELEM_SIGNAL, CONN_BRANCH
</pre>

The full and unique name of this object (one of the signals of a switch) could be:
SL.VRC.VRC_TEST.Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85.Signal.Branch.
In most cases the first 3 fields of the address (world, organisation, service) will be implied (i.e. used as default), and the last two will be only used by the switch itself. Therefore, to communicate with the switch described above the partial address Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85 will be all that is needed for local communiciation.

Note that to control a switch, a request will be send containing the new position. The switch will acknowlege by sending its new position. The switch will take care of adjusting its own element, like signals lights in a consistent manner.
Objects automatically determine their own address (Using configuration info from the description field or from a configuration notecard). Each object has a parent object, for forwarding messages that can't be handled by the object itself.

Update December 21, 2011: 
Here is an example how the system can be used: In a rail yard, the signal hut (or control tower) can contain a map with all signals in the yard. When a switches is flipped by running trains, the switch sends a status message message to its parent structure (the tower), and the tower forwards this to the map(s) it controls that displays the new status. A human user can touch buttons or pull levers in the tower, and those objects will send messages to the switch they are associated with. The switch responds by changing position and sending a message back to the tower with the new state of the switch. The above described functionality is currently up and running in Huckleberry, but the scripts still need a lot of work. All volunteers are welcome.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 12:35, 19 December 2011 (PST)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2011-12-30T05:34:17Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* control system discussion */

{{Talk}}
If you feel that the information about the SLRR standards are not correct or the text needs correction then please feel free to start a discussion on this page

----
===control system discussion===
Original text:
'''''Control'''''
''is the way the rail network as a whole works safely while sharing the rail resources among consists.'' 
Currently (10-2009) there is no such system in place.

;Problem description:
:If rolling stock of multiple operators is allowed on a track, ''traffic control'' will be necessary. The block section type of control system should work, using llSay on a negative channel, phantom alpha detectors on the track, and signals for realism.
:A larger problem is what to do about traffic in the opposite direction. Block Section control could work with a passing siding for each section. Which leads to...
:Another problem - switches. If the Guide rail is used, then it could be turned and moved to divert a train, or line and branch Guides could be alternated between phantom and nonphysical as determined by routing. If a flat or phantom guide rail is used, names can be switched to change which rail is active.

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 14:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

...and what if an actual human wants to use the line rather than "controlled" rolling stock? And, why is a VRC meeting being used to dictate such things, the so-called "Community meeting". I do not recall an announcement on the Second Life blog, forums or anywhere else for a community meeting. The community is more than the VRC, which remains a private group. The SLRR is a resource for all residents, not a private group. I see this arrogant disregard for residents outside of the VCR continues, which doesn't surprise me.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 22:21, 12 June 2011 (PDT)
 
:: If an actual human wants to disregard the information that is provided to allow a pleasant and realistic journey, than that human can just do so. I would like to stress once more, that the "control" that we talk about here is not control of the train operator. What is discussed is the control of signals and other information sources. The VRC works to design a standardized and open information exchange system, that can be used by a human operator or by automated trains, but can just as well be ignored if the human operator wishes to do so. 
::The VRC is an open organisation that in no way claims rights over the SLRR nor prescribes or dictates anything to anybody. If you like to join you are welcome, if you don't want to be involved that is fine to. We will not restrict anybody in using the SLRR in the way they want but, we expect that same attitude from others. If you don't like to discuss ways to design a block control system, please don't do it, but stop cluttering the page with claims of restrictions of your rights that have no basis.

::[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 05:11, 17 December 2011 (PST)
 
 

;SCADAD controll system:

The Virtual Railway Consortium (VRC) is developing an open specification for a generalised control system (SCADAD, Supervisory Control, Data Acquisition & Distribution) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds. Here an overview of the SCADAD protocol is presented. All comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. Interested scripters are invited to contact Moundsa Mayo or Vaughn Deluca.

Currently two implementations are deployed inworld. Along the GSLR a (slightly older) version of the systems communication backbone is running over 7 sims, but no equipment is connected as yet. In the Huckelberry yard, communication between several switches and status maps are tested and the main development is taking place there. A new implementation is planned in Tuliptree.

--General design considerations and requirements

(1) The system must operate fully in-world, i.e. independent off external servers for communication.
 
(2) The system must be as much as possible distributed, i.e. the objects in the system should be able to function independent and autonomous (possibly at a reduced level of functionality). If one entity fails, the remaining entities use sensible defaults to keep up a reasonable level of functionality. This results in graceful degradation of the system when communication starts to fail.
 
(3)The system must be modular and as much as possible self-configuring to allow easy extension with new objects, and provide both efficient and user friendly operation.
 
-- System overview

At the highest level the system can be viewed as a set of objects that exchange protocol messages.
Examples are switches, stations, control towers and message relays. The protocol makes no assumptions about the inner workings of the object. Any object that follows the protocol will be able to communicate. This will allow railway line operators that have developed their own communication systems to use the VRC protocol in addition to their own system and interface it with their local protocols and existing builds simply by dropping some scripts in the object.

The structure of the system is a "vertical" chain of command in which each object knows about nodes lower in the system, and knows the address of one parent object to which messages are forwarded that the object can not handle itself. The chain branches out at the bottom to structures like switches and automated rolling stock, and finally to elements of structures like signals and train detectors. In addition there are "horizontal" connections to allow inter-region communication.

Request messages can be injected at each level. Routing of messages to neighboring regions is done by region controllers that (currently) communicate to pairs of repeaters whispering over region boundaries, but HTTP connections are equally possible. The region controller uses a local routing table to determine in what direction a message that is not addressed to its own region should be forwarded.

These two main "dimensions" in the network (vertical within region, and horizontal between regions) are intersecting at the the region controllers (one per region) that function as routers for messages for objects not present in the region. In each region the region controller talks to one or more downstream control towers, typically managed by parcel owners. The lower parts of the system (switches, stations etc) are also owned and operated by the parcel owner. The region controllers together build a communication "backbone", a shared public network operated by the members of the VRC or equivalent organisation, at a best effort basis. Traveling rolling stock may contact the region controller to request information about the local infrastructure (switches, stations, etc., and in most cases will receive the address of a local tower for further communication.

The chosen design of addressable objects has the advantages that it can be fully in-world (requirement 1), that there is no central point of control, so the system will degrade gracefully (requirement 2) and individual units can be relatively easy added or changed (requirement 3). The drawback is more complexity of the system as a whole, compared to a system where each entity communicates directly with a central hub like an out-of-world server. The biggest advantage is however that the system fits well to the relative fluid nature of SL were parcel owners come and go. The general approach can be compared to the internet, that is not "owned" by anybody and allows every interested party to connect and exchange information using a standard protocol.

-- Message template

All messages that are passed to the different objects in the network have the same format: a set of 16 main fields that together define the message. All 16 fields are always present in each message.
The fields can be individually read from the message using an index into the message.
The destination region of the message is for instance stored in the string at position 3.

<pre>
// =====================================================================
// VRC SCADAD message template v4
// =====================================================================
// Message template fields
//
// integer MSG_INFO = 0; index of message info
// integer MSG_SEQUENCE = 1; index of sequence number
// integer MSG_DEST = 2; index of global destination
// integer MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME = 3; index of destination region
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE = 4; index of destination structure class
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC = 4; index of destination structure location
// integer MSG_DEST_ELEMENT = 6; index of sub-structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER = 7; index of global sender
// integer MSG_SENDER_REGIONNAME = 8; index of sender region
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUC_LOC = 9; index of sender location
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUCTURE = 10; index of sender structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER_ELEMENT = 11; index of sender sub-structure class
// integer MSG_COMMAND = 12; index of command word
// integer MSG_CONTENT_INT = 13; index of payload integer
// integer MSG_CONTENT_FLOAT = 14; index of payload float
// integer MSG_CONTENT_STRING = 15; index of payload string
//integer MSG_CONTENT_KEY = 16; index of payload key
</pre>
Most of the 16 main fields in the template are divided into subfields to make more efficient use of space. The message destination field (MSG_DEST) at position 2 for instance has subfields for "world", "organisation" and "service" constants.

-- Address logic

Communicating objects need a way to address each other. In the SCADAD system each node can send out requests and respond to requests. The destination and origin of a message are specified by building the unique address of the destination from information in the message. See examplem below: words in capitals are predefined constants, CONN_BRANCH indicates for instance the branch side from a Y switch.
<pre>
Field Content Example values
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MSG_DEST World, Organisation, Service SL, VRC, VRC_TEST
MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME RegionName Huckleberry
MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE ObjectType STRUC_SWITCH
MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC x, y, z 132,6,85
MSG_DEST_ELEMENT Element, ElementID ELEM_SIGNAL, CONN_BRANCH
</pre>

The full and unique name of this object (one of the signals of a switch) could be:
SL.VRC.VRC_TEST.Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85.Signal.Branch.
In most cases the first 3 fields of the address (world, organisation, service) will be implied (i.e. used as default), and the last two will be only used by the switch itself. Therefore, to communicate with the switch described above the partial address Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85 will be all that is needed for local communiciation.

Note that to control a switch, a request will be send containing the new position. The switch will acknowlege by sending its new position. The switch will take care of adjusting its own element, like signals lights in a consistent manner.
Objects automatically determine their own address (Using configuration info from the description field or from a configuration notecard). Each object has a parent object, for forwarding messages that can't be handled by the object itself.

Update December 21, 2011: 
Here is an example how the system can be used: In a rail yard, the signal hut (or control tower) can contain a map with all signals in the yard. When a switches is flipped by running trains, the switch sends a status message message to its parent structure (the tower), and the tower forwards this to the map(s) it controls that displays the new status. A human user can touch buttons or pull levers in the tower, and those objects will send messages to the switch they are associated with. The switch responds by changing position and sending a message back to the tower with the new state of the switch. The above described functionality is currently up and running in Huckleberry, but the scripts still need a lot of work. All volunteers are welcome.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 12:35, 19 December 2011 (PST)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2011-12-21T21:18:24Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* control system discussion */

{{Talk}}
If you feel that the information about the SLRR standards are not correct or the text needs correction then please feel free to start a discussion on this page

----
===control system discussion===
Original text:
'''''Control'''''
''is the way the rail network as a whole works safely while sharing the rail resources among consists.'' 
Currently (10-2009) there is no such system in place.

;Problem description:
:If rolling stock of multiple operators is allowed on a track, ''traffic control'' will be necessary. The block section type of control system should work, using llSay on a negative channel, phantom alpha detectors on the track, and signals for realism.
:A larger problem is what to do about traffic in the opposite direction. Block Section control could work with a passing siding for each section. Which leads to...
:Another problem - switches. If the Guide rail is used, then it could be turned and moved to divert a train, or line and branch Guides could be alternated between phantom and nonphysical as determined by routing. If a flat or phantom guide rail is used, names can be switched to change which rail is active.

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 14:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

...and what if an actual human wants to use the line rather than "controlled" rolling stock? And, why is a VRC meeting being used to dictate such things, the so-called "Community meeting". I do not recall an announcement on the Second Life blog, forums or anywhere else for a community meeting. The community is more than the VRC, which remains a private group. The SLRR is a resource for all residents, not a private group. I see this arrogant disregard for residents outside of the VCR continues, which doesn't surprise me.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 22:21, 12 June 2011 (PDT)
 
:: If an actual human wants to disregard the information that is provided to allow a pleasant and realistic journey, than that human can just do so. I would like to stress once more, that the "control" that we talk about here is not control of the train operator. What is discussed is the control of signals and other information sources. The VRC works to design a standardized and open information exchange system, that can be used by a human operator or by automated trains, but can just as well be ignored if the human operator wishes to do so. 
::The VRC is an open organisation that in no way claims rights over the SLRR nor prescribes or dictates anything to anybody. If you like to join you are welcome, if you don't want to be involved that is fine to. We will not restrict anybody in using the SLRR in the way they want but, we expect that same attitude from others. If you don't like to discuss ways to design a block control system, please don't do it, but stop cluttering the page with claims of restrictions of your rights that have no basis.

::[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 05:11, 17 December 2011 (PST)
 
 

;SCADAD controll system:

The Virtual Railway Consortium (VRC) is developing an open specification for a generalised control system (SCADAD, Supervisory Control, Data Acquisition & Distribution) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds. Here an overview of the SCADAD protocol is presented. All comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. Interested scripters are invited to contact Moundsa Mayo or Vaughn Deluca.

Currently two implementations are deployed inworld. Along the GSLR a (slightly older) version of the systems communication backbone is running over 7 sims, but no equipment is connected as yet. In the Huckelberry yard, communication between several switches and status maps are tested and the main development is taking place there. A new implementation is planned in Tuliptree.

--General design considerations and requirements

(1) The system must operate fully in-world, i.e. independent off external servers for communication.
 
(2) The system must be as much as possible distributed, i.e. the objects in the system should be able to function independent and autonomous (possibly at a reduced level of functionality). If one entity fails, the remaining entities use sensible defaults to keep up a reasonable level of functionality. This results in graceful degradation of the system when communication starts to fail.
 
(3)The system must be modular and as much as possible self-configuring to allow easy extension with new objects, and provide both efficient and user friendly operation.
 
-- System overview

At the highest level the system can be viewed as a set of objects that exchange protocol messages.
Examples are switches, stations, control towers and message relays. The protocol makes no assumptions about the inner workings of the object. Any object that follows the protocol will be able to communicate. This will allow railway line operators that have developed their own communication systems to use the VRC protocol in addition to their own system and interface it with their local protocols and existing builds simply by dropping some scripts in the object.

The structure of the system is a "vertical" chain of command in which each object knows about nodes lower in the system, and knows the address of one parent object to which messages are forwarded that the object can not handle itself. The chain branches out at the bottom to structures like switches and automated rolling stock, and finally to elements of structures like signals and train detectors. In addition there are "horizontal" connections to allow inter-region communication.

Request messages can be injected at each level. Routing of messages to neighboring regions is done by region controllers that (currently) communicate to pairs of repeaters whispering over region boundaries, but HTTP connections are equally possible. The region controller uses a local routing table to determine in what direction a message that is not addressed to its own region should be forwarded.

These two main "dimensions" in the network (vertical within region, and horizontal between regions) are intersecting at the the region controllers (one per region) that function as routers for messages for objects not present in the region. In each region the region controller talks to one or more downstream control towers, typically managed by parcel owners. The lower parts of the system (switches, stations etc) are also owned and operated by the parcel owner. The region controllers together build a communication "backbone", a shared public network operated by the members of the VRC or equivalent organisation, at a best effort basis. Traveling rolling stock may contact the region controller to request information about the local infrastructure (switches, stations, etc., and in most cases will receive the address of a local tower for further communication.

The chosen design of addressable objects has the advantages that it can be fully in-world (requirement 1), that there is no central point of control, so the system will degrade gracefully (requirement 2) and individual units can be relatively easy added or changed (requirement 3). The drawback is more complexity of the system as a whole, compared to a system where each entity communicates directly with a central hub like an out-of-world server. The biggest advantage is however that the system fits well to the relative fluid nature of SL were parcel owners come and go. The general approach can be compared to the internet, that is not "owned" by anybody and allows every interested party to connect and exchange information using a standard protocol.

-- Message template

All messages that are passed to the different objects in the network have the same format: a set of 16 main fields that together define the message. All 16 fields are always present in each message.
The fields can be individually read from the message using an index into the message.
The destination region of the message is for instance stored in the string at position 3.

<pre>
// =====================================================================
// VRC SCADAD message template v4
// =====================================================================
// Message template fields
//
// integer MSG_INFO = 0; index of message info
// integer MSG_SEQUENCE = 1; index of sequence number
// integer MSG_DEST = 2; index of global destination
// string MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME = 3; index of destination region
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC = 4; index of destination structure location
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE = 5; index of destination structure class
// integer MSG_DEST_ELEMENT = 6; index of sub-structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER = 7; index of global sender
// string MSG_SENDER_REGIONNAME = 8; index of sender region
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUC_LOC = 9; index of sender location
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUCTURE = 10; index of sender structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER_ELEMENT = 11; index of sender sub-structure class
// integer MSG_COMMAND = 12; index of command word
// integer MSG_CONTENT_INT = 13; index of payload integer
// float MSG_CONTENT_FLOAT = 14; index of payload float
// string MSG_CONTENT_STRING = 15; index of payload string
// string MSG_CONTENT_KEY = 16; index of payload key
</pre>
Most of the 16 main fields in the template are divided into subfields to make more efficient use of space. The message destination field (MSG_DEST) at position 2 for instance has subfields for "world", "organisation" and "service" constants.

-- Address logic

Communicating objects need a way to address each other. In the SCADAD system each node can send out requests and respond to requests. The destination and origin of a message are specified by building the unique address of the destination from information in the message. See examplem below: words in capitals are predefined constants, CONN_BRANCH indicates for instance the branch side from a Y switch.
<pre>
Field Content Example values
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MSG_DEST World, Organisation, Service SL, VRC, VRC_TEST
MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME RegionName Huckleberry
MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE ObjectType STRUC_SWITCH
MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC x, y, z 132,6,85
MSG_DEST_ELEMENT Element, ElementID ELEM_SIGNAL, CONN_BRANCH
</pre>

The full and unique name of this object (one of the signals of a switch) could be:
SL.VRC.VRC_TEST.Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85.Signal.Branch.
In most cases the first 3 fields of the address (world, organisation, service) will be implied (i.e. used as default), and the last two will be only used by the switch itself. Therefore, to communicate with the switch described above the partial address Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85 will be all that is needed for local communiciation.

Note that to control a switch, a request will be send containing the new position. The switch will acknowlege by sending its new position. The switch will take care of adjusting its own element, like signals lights in a consistent manner.
Objects automatically determine their own address (Using configuration info from the description field or from a configuration notecard). Each object has a parent object, for forwarding messages that can't be handled by the object itself.

Update December 21, 2011: 
Here is an example how the system can be used: In a rail yard, the signal hut (or control tower) can contain a map with all signals in the yard. When a switches is flipped by running trains, the switch sends a status message message to its parent structure (the tower), and the tower forwards this to the map(s) it controls that displays the new status. A human user can touch buttons or pull levers in the tower, and those objects will send messages to the switch they are associated with. The switch responds by changing position and sending a message back to the tower with the new state of the switch. The above described functionality is currently up and running in Huckleberry, but the scripts still need a lot of work. All volunteers are welcome.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 12:35, 19 December 2011 (PST)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2011-12-19T20:35:02Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* control system discussion */

{{Talk}}
If you feel that the information about the SLRR standards are not correct or the text needs correction then please feel free to start a discussion on this page

----
===control system discussion===
Original text:
'''''Control'''''
''is the way the rail network as a whole works safely while sharing the rail resources among consists.'' 
Currently (10-2009) there is no such system in place.

;Problem description:
:If rolling stock of multiple operators is allowed on a track, ''traffic control'' will be necessary. The block section type of control system should work, using llSay on a negative channel, phantom alpha detectors on the track, and signals for realism.
:A larger problem is what to do about traffic in the opposite direction. Block Section control could work with a passing siding for each section. Which leads to...
:Another problem - switches. If the Guide rail is used, then it could be turned and moved to divert a train, or line and branch Guides could be alternated between phantom and nonphysical as determined by routing. If a flat or phantom guide rail is used, names can be switched to change which rail is active.

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 14:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

...and what if an actual human wants to use the line rather than "controlled" rolling stock? And, why is a VRC meeting being used to dictate such things, the so-called "Community meeting". I do not recall an announcement on the Second Life blog, forums or anywhere else for a community meeting. The community is more than the VRC, which remains a private group. The SLRR is a resource for all residents, not a private group. I see this arrogant disregard for residents outside of the VCR continues, which doesn't surprise me.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 22:21, 12 June 2011 (PDT)
 
:: If an actual human wants to disregard the information that is provided to allow a pleasant and realistic journey, than that human can just do so. I would like to stress once more, that the "control" that we talk about here is not control of the train operator. What is discussed is the control of signals and other information sources. The VRC works to design a standardized and open information exchange system, that can be used by a human operator or by automated trains, but can just as well be ignored if the human operator wishes to do so. 
::The VRC is an open organisation that in no way claims rights over the SLRR nor prescribes or dictates anything to anybody. If you like to join you are welcome, if you don't want to be involved that is fine to. We will not restrict anybody in using the SLRR in the way they want but, we expect that same attitude from others. If you don't like to discuss ways to design a block control system, please don't do it, but stop cluttering the page with claims of restrictions of your rights that have no basis.

::[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 05:11, 17 December 2011 (PST)
 
 

;SCADAD controll system:

The Virtual Railway Consortium (VRC) is developing an open specification for a generalised control system (SCADAD, Supervisory Control, Data Acquisition & Distribution) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds. Here an overview of the SCADAD protocol is presented. All comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. Interested scripters are invited to contact Moundsa Mayo or Vaughn Deluca.

Currently two implementations are deployed inworld. Along the GSLR a (slightly older) version of the systems communication backbone is running over 7 sims, but no equipment is connected as yet. In the Huckelberry yard, communication between several switches and status maps are tested and the main development is taking place there. A new implementation is planned in Tuliptree.

--General design considerations and requirements

(1) The system must operate fully in-world, i.e. independent off external servers for communication.
 
(2) The system must be as much as possible distributed, i.e. the objects in the system should be able to function independent and autonomous (possibly at a reduced level of functionality). If one entity fails, the remaining entities use sensible defaults to keep up a reasonable level of functionality. This results in graceful degradation of the system when communication starts to fail.
 
(3)The system must be modular and as much as possible self-configuring to allow easy extension with new objects, and provide both efficient and user friendly operation.
 
-- System overview

At the highest level the system can be viewed as a set of objects that exchange protocol messages.
Examples are switches, stations, control towers and message relays. The protocol makes no assumptions about the inner workings of the object. Any object that follows the protocol will be able to communicate. This will allow railway line operators that have developed their own communication systems to use the VRC protocol in addition to their own system and interface it with their local protocols and existing builds simply by dropping some scripts in the object.

The structure of the system is a "vertical" chain of command in which each object knows about nodes lower in the system, and knows the address of one parent object to which messages are forwarded that the object can not handle itself. The chain branches out at the bottom to structures like switches and automated rolling stock, and finally to elements of structures like signals and train detectors. In addition there are "horizontal" connections to allow inter-region communication.

Request messages can be injected at each level. Routing of messages to neighboring regions is done by region controllers that (currently) communicate to pairs of repeaters whispering over region boundaries, but HTTP connections are equally possible. The region controller uses a local routing table to determine in what direction a message that is not addressed to its own region should be forwarded.

These two main "dimensions" in the network (vertical within region, and horizontal between regions) are intersecting at the the region controllers (one per region) that function as routers for messages for objects not present in the region. In each region the region controller talks to one or more downstream control towers, typically managed by parcel owners. The lower parts of the system (switches, stations etc) are also owned and operated by the parcel owner. The region controllers together build a communication "backbone", a shared public network operated by the members of the VRC or equivalent organisation, at a best effort basis. Traveling rolling stock may contact the region controller to request information about the local infrastructure (switches, stations, etc., and in most cases will receive the address of a local tower for further communication.

The chosen design of addressable objects has the advantages that it can be fully in-world (requirement 1), that there is no central point of control, so the system will degrade gracefully (requirement 2) and individual units can be relatively easy added or changed (requirement 3). The drawback is more complexity of the system as a whole, compared to a system where each entity communicates directly with a central hub like an out-of-world server. The biggest advantage is however that the system fits well to the relative fluid nature of SL were parcel owners come and go. The general approach can be compared to the internet, that is not "owned" by anybody and allows every interested party to connect and exchange information using a standard protocol.

-- Message template

All messages that are passed to the different objects in the network have the same format: a set of 16 main fields that together define the message. All 16 fields are always present in each message.
The fields can be individually read from the message using an index into the message.
The destination region of the message is for instance stored in the string at position 3.

<pre>
// =====================================================================
// VRC SCADAD message template v4
// =====================================================================
// Message template fields
//
// integer MSG_INFO = 0; index of message info
// integer MSG_SEQUENCE = 1; index of sequence number
// integer MSG_DEST = 2; index of global destination
// string MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME = 3; index of destination region
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC = 4; index of destination structure location
// integer MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE = 5; index of destination structure class
// integer MSG_DEST_ELEMENT = 6; index of sub-structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER = 7; index of global sender
// string MSG_SENDER_REGIONNAME = 8; index of sender region
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUC_LOC = 9; index of sender location
// integer MSG_SENDER_STRUCTURE = 10; index of sender structure class
// integer MSG_SENDER_ELEMENT = 11; index of sender sub-structure class
// integer MSG_COMMAND = 12; index of command word
// integer MSG_CONTENT_INT = 13; index of payload integer
// float MSG_CONTENT_FLOAT = 14; index of payload float
// string MSG_CONTENT_STRING = 15; index of payload string
// string MSG_CONTENT_KEY = 16; index of payload key
</pre>
Most of the 16 main fields in the template are divided into subfields to make more efficient use of space. The message destination field (MSG_DEST) at position 2 for instance has subfields for "world", "organisation" and "service" constants.

-- Address logic

Communicating objects need a way to address each other. In the SCADAD system each node can send out requests and respond to requests. The destination and origin of a message are specified by building the unique address of the destination from information in the message. See examplem below: words in capitals are predefined constants, CONN_BRANCH indicates for instance the branch side from a Y switch.
<pre>
Field Content Example values
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MSG_DEST World, Organisation, Service SL, VRC, VRC_TEST
MSG_DEST_REGIONNAME RegionName Huckleberry
MSG_DEST_STRUCTURE ObjectType STRUC_SWITCH
MSG_DEST_STRUC_LOC x, y, z 132,6,85
MSG_DEST_ELEMENT Element, ElementID ELEM_SIGNAL, CONN_BRANCH
</pre>

The full and unique name of this object (one of the signals of a switch) could be:
SL.VRC.VRC_TEST.Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85.Signal.Branch.
In most cases the first 3 fields of the address (world, organisation, service) will be implied (i.e. used as default), and the last two will be only used by the switch itself. Therefore, to communicate with the switch described above the partial address Huckleberry.Switch.132,6,85 will be all that is needed for local communiciation.

Note that to control a switch, a request will be send containing the new position. The switch will acknowlege by sending its new position. The switch will take care of adjusting its own element, like signals lights in a consistent manner.
Objects automatically determine their own address (Using configuration info from the description field or from a configuration notecard). Each object has a parent object, for forwarding messages that can't be handled by the object itself.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 12:35, 19 December 2011 (PST)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR standards

2011-12-17T13:11:55Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* control system discussion */

Talk:Virtual Railway Consortium

2011-01-09T12:10:54Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Proposal to set up VRC development pages */

{{Talk}}

The Virtual Railway Consortium group page is maintained by members of the VRC. If you have questions about the content of these pages you can put them here.

===Proposal to set up VRC development pages===

====Rail information system====
The VRC is developing an open specification for a generalised signaling and control system (SCADAD, Signal Control, Data Auisition and Delivery) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds.

I would like to start a set of pages to document the state of development. More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the outcome of those discussions and some more general remarks about the system would be well positioned here. The SLRR pages are not well suited for this type of <del>discussion</del> information since the SCADAD system in not limited the SLRR and because as far as SLRR equipment go's we can only ''follow'' the developments. <del>Here i would like to discuss possible ''extensions'' of exisiting standards and try out new ideas. </del>The new wiki pages should document existing VRC systems and standards. On the VRC webpage we could discuss possible ''extensions'' of exisiting standards and try out new ideas.

I propose to create aheading on the main page called "VRC open development"
and under that a link to the the SCADAD rail information system, and possibly to other projects.

Does this sound sensible?

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 14:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

re: proposal rail information system: The wiki is a place to put reference pages for others to see how things at are actually used inworld are made or used. Wiki is less suitable for discussions.

[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Stryker, I ''completely'' agree, thats why I wrote
More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the ''outcome'' of those discussions...

I have removed the last line of my intro, that slipped in, and actually was intended to refer to the ''VRC website'' and clarified the text.

My intention is be to publish in the wiki:
* The standards for the VRC Projects as far as they have been set
* Inworld Locations were reference implementations are deployed
* A repository of released VRC scripts

At least the SCADAD project has reached a point were certain parts (like the message template) are very unlikly to change anymore.
Soon a request for comments will go out on the proposed standard.
We need a place to document the standard, so other people to that would like to work on VRC projects can find it.

Real development discussion is indeed better done on the VRC website, and in the near future i will start some discussions in the scripters forum there, for instance outlining my thoughts on ways to efficiently compute and distribute "estimated time of arrival" information. Once that system is hammered out it will be implemented inworld, for instance in Huckleberry or the VRC Yard in Tuliptree, and only at ''that'' point the documentation might appear on the VRC wiki.
But for the SCADAD template that stage has been reached, it has been running for almost a year in Huckleberry without failure, and it was fine-tuned during developement.
We are now actually at version 4 of the pre-alpha stage, and its time to set the standard and freeze the template. We need a place to do that.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 08:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Virtual Railway Consortium

2011-01-09T11:46:08Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Rail information system */

{{Talk}}

The Virtual Railway Consortium group page is maintained by members of the VRC. If you have questions about the content of these pages you can put them here.

===Proposal to set up VRC development pages===

====Rail information system====
The VRC is developing an open specification for a generalised signaling and control system (SCADAD, Signal Control, Data Auisition and Delivery) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds.

I would like to start a set of pages to document the state of development. More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the outcome of those discussions and some more general remarks about the system would be well positioned here. The SLRR pages are not well suited for this type of discussion since the SCADAD system in not limited the SLRR and because as far as SLRR equipment go's we can only ''follow'' the developments. <del>Here i would like to discuss possible ''extensions'' of exisiting standards and try out new ideas. </del>

I propose to create aheading on the main page called "VRC open development"
and under that a link to the the SCADAD rail information system, and possibly to other projects.

Does this sound sensible?

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 14:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

re: proposal rail information system: The wiki is a place to put reference pages for others to see how things at are actually used inworld are made or used. Wiki is less suitable for discussions.

[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Stryker, I ''completely'' agree, thats why I wrote
More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the ''outcome'' of those discussions...
Note that i I have removed the last line of my intro, that slipped in, and actually was intended to refer to the ''VRC website''.
My intention is be to publish in the wiki:
* The standards for the VRC Projects as far as they have been set
* Inworld Locations were reference implementations are deployed
* A repository of released VRC scripts

At least the SCADAD project has reached a point were certain parts (like the message template) are very unlikly to change anymore.
Soon a request for comments will go out on the proposed standard.
We need a place to document the standard, so other people to that would like to work on VRC projects can find it.

Real development discussion is indeed better done on the VRC website, and in the near future i will start some discussions in the scripters forum there, for instance outlining my thoughts on ways to efficiently compute and distribute "estimated time of arrival" information. Once that system is hammered out it will be implemented inworld, for instance in Huckleberry or the VRC Yard in Tuliptree, and only at ''that'' point the documentation might appear on the VRC wiki.
But for the SCADAD template that stage has been reached, it has been running for almost a year in Huckleberry without failure, and it was fine-tuned during developement.
We are now actually at version 4 of the pre-alpha stage, and its time to set the standard and freeze the template. We need a place to do that.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 08:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Virtual Railway Consortium

2011-01-09T09:05:18Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Rail information system */

{{Talk}}

The Virtual Railway Consortium group page is maintained by members of the VRC. If you have questions about the content of these pages you can put them here.

===Proposal to set up VRC development pages===

====Rail information system====
The VRC is developing an open specification for a generalised signaling and control system (SCADAD, Signal Control, Data Auisition and Delivery) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds.

I would like to start a set of pages to document the state of development. More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the outcome of those discussions and some more general remarks about the system would be well positioned here. The SLRR pages are not well suited for this type of discussion since the SCADAD system in not limited the SLRR and because as far as SLRR equipment go's we can only ''follow'' the developments.

I propose to create aheading on the main page called "VRC open development"
and under that a link to the the SCADAD rail information system, and possibly to other projects.

Does this sound sensible?

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 14:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

re: proposal rail information system: The wiki is a place to put reference pages for others to see how things at are actually used inworld are made or used. Wiki is less suitable for discussions.

[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Stryker, I ''completely'' agree, thats why I wrote
More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the ''outcome'' of those discussions...
Note that i I have removed the last line of my intro, that slipped in, and actually was intended to refer to the ''VRC website''.
My intention is be to publish in the wiki:
* The standards for the VRC Projects as far as they have been set
* Inworld Locations were reference implementations are deployed
* A repository of released VRC scripts

At least the SCADAD project has reached a point were certain parts (like the message template) are very unlikly to change anymore.
Soon a request for comments will go out on the proposed standard.
We need a place to document the standard, so other people to that would like to work on VRC projects can find it.

Real development discussion is indeed better done on the VRC website, and in the near future i will start some discussions in the scripters forum there, for instance outlining my thoughts on ways to efficiently compute and distribute "estimated time of arrival" information. Once that system is hammered out it will be implemented inworld, for instance in Huckleberry or the VRC Yard in Tuliptree, and only at ''that'' point the documentation might appear on the VRC wiki.
But for the SCADAD template that stage has been reached, it has been running for almost a year in Huckleberry without failure, and it was fine-tuned during developement.
We are now actually at version 4 of the pre-alpha stage, and its time to set the standard and freeze the template. We need a place to do that.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 08:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Virtual Railway Consortium

2011-01-09T08:57:19Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Rail information system */

{{Talk}}

The Virtual Railway Consortium group page is maintained by members of the VRC. If you have questions about the content of these pages you can put them here.

===Proposal to set up VRC development pages===

====Rail information system====
The VRC is developing an open specification for a generalised signaling and control system (SCADAD, Signal Control, Data Auisition and Delivery) for public transport in SL-like virtual worlds.

I would like to start a set of pages to document the state of development. More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the outcome of those discussions and some more general remarks about the system would be well positioned here. The SLRR pages are not well suited for this type of discussion since the SCADAD system in not limited the SLRR and because as far as SLRR equipment go's we can only ''follow'' the developments. Here i would like to discuss possible ''extensions'' of exisiting standards and try out new ideas.

I propose to create aheading on the main page called "VRC open development"
and under that a link to the the SCADAD rail information system, and possibly to other projects.

Does this sound sensible?

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 14:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

re: proposal rail information system: The wiki is a place to put reference pages for others to see how things at are actually used inworld are made or used. Wiki is less suitable for discussions.

[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Stryker, I ''completely'' agree, thats why I wrote
More informal talk and discussion can be done on the VRC website, but the ''outcome'' of those discussions...

My intention is be to publish
* The standards for the VRC Projects as far as they have been set
* Inworld Locations were reference implementations are deployed
* A repository of released VRC scripts

At least the SCADAD project has reached a point were certain parts (like the message template) are very unlikly to change anymore.
Soon a request for comments will go out on the proposed standard.
We need a place to document the standard, so other people to that would like to work on VRC projects can find it.

Real development discussion is indeed better done on the VRC website, and in the near future i will start some discussions in the scripters forum there, for instance outlining my thoughts on ways to efficiently compute and distribute "estimated time of arrival" information. Once that system is hammered out it will be implemented inworld, for instance in Huckleberry or the VRC Yard in Tuliptree, and only at ''that'' point the documentation might appear on the VRC wiki.
But for the SCADAD template that stage has been reached, it has been running for almost a year in Huckleberry without failure, and it was fine-tuned during developement.
We are now actually at version 4 of the pre-alpha stage, and its time to set the standard and freeze the template. We need a place to do that.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 08:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Virtual Railway Consortium

2011-01-08T14:20:42Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Talk */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-08T09:29:00Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A Demo script for this specification */

{{Talk}}

On this page you can voice your comments and your own idea about the SLRR Switch concept

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 21:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
----
CORRECTION: While desirable, the ability to switch from one track to another on the SLRR is NOT essential. Our locomotives are made of 0s and 1s, not 100 tons of iron, they can be easily moved from one track to another. Also, switches such as the one described here have been available from private SL residents for years. Jer Straaf

CORRECTION TO THE CORRECTION
>>...While desirable, the ability to switch from one track to another on the SLRR is NOT essential...<< 
You're right. it isn't essential, but tedious to move the trains by editing them. It is killing a lot of the experience
[[User:Everest Piek|Everest Piek]] 21:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

== problem about being noob proof ==

In RL, the switches are signalled as they are built, means, there are always a straight track and a branching track.
the arrow is always showing to the branching track, thats not necessarily a branching Line.
For that, having the signals once this way, once the other way, might be confusing to noobs.
I would plead for having them in a universal way set as the switches are built, as they are signalled in RL.
[[User:Everest Piek|Everest Piek]] 21:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:*There is a little bit of education to be done. I agree with the principle of making sure the switches are all setup the same way. In order to make the switches more Noob friendly the dwarflights are also installed. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 09:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

:* Thanks Guys. I will redact my statment under the Signal diagram and build tham as Everest advises. Sylvan
:

===An exact specification of the way the description string in the switch stand should be read is needed.===

''Example problem:''
A train script might get the switch channel by reading the item in the string at index 5. This is OK. However, another train script reads the ''last'' field of the description string to get the channel. This would also work, ''and is within the current specification''.

While both scripts follow the standard, the last script limits compatibility. An advanced switch script, ''may'' for instance have a ~ and a private channel added at the end of the description string. The first train script would work, and the last train script would get the wrong channel and break with this advances switch script.
To maintain maximal freedom for experimentation without risk of breaking existing scripts, the standard needs to be specific about the posibility that extra information might be present in the string.

The key point is that the standard for the description string currently specifies the ''minimal info'' that a script can expect. For maximal flexibility it should be clear that in the future in each field information might be added. Therfore, indexes should be use to read the data from the description (See example script below)

====Proposed text to be put up in the page:====

Currently 6 fields are defined, delimited by "~" Their indexes are:

:'''0''' unique identifier of the switch
:'''1''' current status of the switch
:'''2''' heading connection-info
:'''3''' main connection-info
:'''4''' branch connection-info
:'''5''' channel for local control of the switch

Indexes and descriptions for the subfields within these fields:

:- Within the''' identifier''' of the switch, ''at least'' the following parts are expected, delimited by "."

:'''0''' region name
:'''1''' x coordinate of switch root prim
:'''2''' y coordinate of switch root prim
:'''3''' z coordinate of switch root prim

- Within the '''status field''' ''at least'' the following part is expected, future extensions will be delimeted by "."

:'''0''' text string describing switch status
:Currently the only defined ''values'' for this part are "Main" and "Branch"

- Within each '''connection-info fields (heading, main and branch fields)''' ''at least'' the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
:'''0''' Informal destination description string

Within the '''channel field''' ''at least'' the following part is expected, future extensions will be delimeted by "."
:'''0''' channel for local control

====A Demo script for this specification====

// ===================================================================================
// Example script to show correct reading of the description string of SLRR switchstands
//
// Executive sumary
// The key routine in this example is the function GetDescriptionSubfield
// This routine accepts a description string, and indices for field en subfield to read.
// The data at the indicated position in the description is returned.
//
// Demo script function
// Touching the prim that contains this script will tell the owner the ID of the detected
// switches, the destinations (given the current status) and the chat channel.
// The utility function ReadSwitchDescription provides an easy way to extract any of the subfields
// in a way that will not break when private switches are encountered that have additional info
// in the description (sub)field.
// This example is in the public domain and can be used freely
// ===================================================================================
//
// Remarks:
// A good case can be made for re-wording the standard in such a way to it is NOT
// alllowed anymore to add new subfields in exisiting parts, but ONLY fields and subfields
// at the end of the string.
// That would simplify the decoding, but yield a slightly less logical description.
//
//
// BEWARE! The description field is limited to 127 bytes, this might not be obvious until
// the prim is stored in inventory and re-rezzed.
// ===================================================================================

// Constants to be used to retrieve fields and subfields of the description string
// of SLRR standard switches. Currently 6 fields are defined, delimited by "~"

string NAME_SWITCH = "Switch Stand";

integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID = 0; // unique identifier of the switch
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_STATUS = 1; // current status of the switch
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_HEADING = 2; // heading connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_MAIN = 3; // main connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_BRANCH = 4; // branch connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_CHANNEL = 5; // channel for local control of the switch

//Within the ID field at least the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
integer ADDRESS_REGION = 0; // region name
integer ADDRESS_X = 1; // x coordinate of switch root prim
integer ADDRESS_Y = 2; // y coordinate of switch root prim
integer ADDRESS_Z = 3; // z coordinate of switch root prim

// Within the STATUS field at least the following part is expected
// Future extensions will be delimeted by "."
integer STATUS = 0; // Text string of status

// Currently only the following values for STATUS have been defined
string NAME_MAIN = "Main";
string NAME_BRANCH = "Branch";

//Witin the connection descriptions (HEADING, MAIN and BRANCH) at least the following
/ part is expected. Future extensions will be delimeted by "."
integer CONNECTION_DESTINATION = 0; // Informal description of direction for this connection

//Witin the CHANNEL description field at least the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
integer LOCAL_CHANNEL = 0; // channel for local control of the switch

// ===================================================================================
// Function GetDescriptionSubfield. Read one subfield of the switchstand description
// Returns a string with the requested subfield. Note that for fields that contains only a
// single item field and subfield are equivalent.
// ====================================================================================

string GetDescriptionSubfield(string sDescription, integer iField, integer iSubField)
{
// Compact one line version
return(llList2String(llParseString2List(llList2String(llParseString2List(sDescription, ["~"],[]), iField), ["."],[]), iSubField));

// Here is how this function is composed:
// list lFields = llParseString2List(sDescription, ["~"],[]); // get the main fields
// string sOneField = llList2String(lFields, iField); // pick the one we need
// list lSubfields = llParseString2List(sOneField, ["."],[]); // Get the subfields
// string sOneSubfield = llList2String(lSubfields, iSubField); // Pick the one we need
// return(sOneSubfield);
}

// ===================================================================================
// *** Main program ***
// We use the example script for the sensor event on the wikki as the basis of this demo
// Note that there are in principle more efficient ways to get the description string
// of the prim than a sensor (using messaging between swtiches). These methods are
// currently under development by the VRC
// ===================================================================================

// Sensor variables
float g_fRange; // in meters
float g_fArc; // in radial
float g_fSphere; // in radial

default
{
state_entry()
{
g_fSphere = PI; // look all around, not used in this demo
g_fArc = PI/4; // look forward, make cone as narrow as practical
g_fRange = 10; // 10 meter, dont scan more than you need
}

touch_start(integer numberDetected)
{
// We look for the switch stand (an active object)
llSensor(NAME_SWITCH, "", ACTIVE, g_fRange, g_fArc);
}

sensor (integer numberDetected)
{
// Note: in this example all variables are explicitly named and stored, in a real application
// this could be done more compact ( see for an example the code of GetDescriptionSubfield()
// For clarity we expand the string handling here.

string sDescription;
string sStatus;
string sRegion;
string sX;
string sY;
string sZ;
string sDestination;
string sChannel;

//prepare the response string, we start with a new line
string msg = "\n";

integer i = -1;
while(numberDetected > ++i) //loop trough all detected items
{
//First get the full description string of the detected switch
sDescription = (string)llGetObjectDetails( llDetectedKey(i), [OBJECT_DESC]);

// We extract the Region of this switch, the unique identifier x.y.z and the local channel number
// Note that it would be more convenient to have the location vector coordinates delimited by ","
// like in a standard vector. This would allow easier
// retrieval of the whole vector <x.y.z>

sRegion = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_REGION);
sX = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_X);
sY = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_Y);
sZ = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_Z);
sChannel = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_CHANNEL, LOCAL_CHANNEL);

//Look at the current status using the GetDescriptionSubfield function
sStatus = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_STATUS, STATUS);

// Get the destination for the current setting
if (sStatus == NAME_MAIN)
{
sDestination=GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_MAIN, CONNECTION_DESTINATION);

}
else if(sStatus == NAME_BRANCH)
{
sDestination=GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_BRANCH, CONNECTION_DESTINATION);
}

else
{
sDestination = "destination unknown (due to invalid status)";
}

msg += sRegion + " " + sX+ "," + sY + " using channel " + sChannel + " " + "is currently set for " + sDestination + "\n";
}
llWhisper(0, msg);
}

no_sensor()
{
llOwnerSay("No switch within viewing range");
}
}

Note that none of this is mandatory for a scripter. If sombody want to write quick and dirty code that works now, that is fine. However, the point is that such a script can not be expected to keep working in the future. Scripts using the techique outlined in the above example are guaranteed to work, even if additional info is added to the description string.

This priciple is more general than the switch standard example, and for ''all'' description strings a script should retrieve the info using indexes rather than asuming that no additonal info will ever be present.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 00:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T18:57:15Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A script header for this specification might look like this: */

{{Talk}}

On this page you can voice your comments and your own idea about the SLRR Switch concept

--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 21:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
----
CORRECTION: While desirable, the ability to switch from one track to another on the SLRR is NOT essential. Our locomotives are made of 0s and 1s, not 100 tons of iron, they can be easily moved from one track to another. Also, switches such as the one described here have been available from private SL residents for years. Jer Straaf

CORRECTION TO THE CORRECTION
>>...While desirable, the ability to switch from one track to another on the SLRR is NOT essential...<< 
You're right. it isn't essential, but tedious to move the trains by editing them. It is killing a lot of the experience
[[User:Everest Piek|Everest Piek]] 21:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

== problem about being noob proof ==

In RL, the switches are signalled as they are built, means, there are always a straight track and a branching track.
the arrow is always showing to the branching track, thats not necessarily a branching Line.
For that, having the signals once this way, once the other way, might be confusing to noobs.
I would plead for having them in a universal way set as the switches are built, as they are signalled in RL.
[[User:Everest Piek|Everest Piek]] 21:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:*There is a little bit of education to be done. I agree with the principle of making sure the switches are all setup the same way. In order to make the switches more Noob friendly the dwarflights are also installed. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 09:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

:* Thanks Guys. I will redact my statment under the Signal diagram and build tham as Everest advises. Sylvan
:

===An exact specification of the way the description string in the switch stand should be read is needed.===

''Example problem:''
A train script might get the switch channel by reading the item in the string at index 5. This is OK. However, another train script reads the ''last'' field of the description string to get the channel. This would also work, ''and is within the current specification''.

While both scripts follow the standard, the last script limits compatibility. An advanced switch script, ''may'' for instance have a ~ and a private channel added at the end of the description string. The first train script would work, and the last train script would get the wrong channel and break with this advances switch script.
To maintain maximal freedom for experimentation without risk of breaking existing scripts, the standard needs to be specific about the posibility that extra information might be present in the string.

The key point is that the standard for the description string currently specifies the ''minimal info'' that a script can expect. For maximal flexibility it should be clear that in the future in each field information might be added. Therfore, indexes should be use to read the data from the description (See example script below)

====Proposed text to be put up in the page:====

Currently 6 fields are defined, delimited by "~" Their indexes are:

:'''0''' unique identifier of the switch
:'''1''' current status of the switch
:'''2''' heading connection-info
:'''3''' main connection-info
:'''4''' branch connection-info
:'''5''' channel for local control of the switch

Indexes and descriptions for the subfields within these fields:

:- Within the''' identifier''' of the switch, ''at least'' the following parts are expected, delimited by "."

:'''0''' region name
:'''1''' x coordinate of switch root prim
:'''2''' y coordinate of switch root prim
:'''3''' z coordinate of switch root prim

- Within the '''status field''' ''at least'' the following part is expected, future extensions will be delimeted by "."

:'''0''' text string describing switch status
:Currently the only defined ''values'' for this part are "Main" and "Branch"

- Within each '''connection-info fields (heading, main and branch fields)''' ''at least'' the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
:'''0''' Informal destination description string

Within the '''channel field''' ''at least'' the following part is expected, future extensions will be delimeted by "."
:'''0''' channel for local control

====A Demo script for this specification====

// ===================================================================================
// Example script to show correct reading of the description string of SLRR switchstands
//
// Executive sumary
// The key routine in this example is the function GetDescriptionSubfield:
// This routine accepts a description string, and indices for field en subfield to read.
// The data at the indicated position in the description is returned.
//
// Touching the prim that contains this script will tell the owner the ID of the detected
// switches, the destinations (given the current status) and the chat channel.
// The utility function ReadSwitchDescription provides an easy way to extract any of the subfields
// in a way that will not break when private switches are encountered that have additional info
// in the description (sub)field.
// This example is in the public domain and can be used freely
// ===================================================================================
//
// Remarks:
// A good case can be made for re-wording the standard in such a way to it is NOT
// alllowed anymore to add new subfields, but ONLY fields amnd subfields at the end of the string.
// That would simplify the decoding, but yield a slightly less logical description.
//
//
// BEWARE! The description field is limited to 127 bytes, this might not be obvious until
// the prim is stored in inventory and re-rezzed.
// ===================================================================================

// Constants to be used to retrieve fields and subfields of the description string
// of SLRR standard switches. Currently 6 fields are defined, delimited by "~"

string NAME_SWITCH = "Switch Stand";

integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID = 0; // unique identifier of the switch
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_STATUS = 1; // current status of the switch
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_HEADING = 2; // heading connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_MAIN = 3; // main connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_BRANCH = 4; // branch connection info
integer SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_CHANNEL = 5; // channel for local control of the switch

//Within the ID field at least the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
integer ADDRESS_REGION = 0; // region name
integer ADDRESS_X = 1; // x coordinate of switch root prim
integer ADDRESS_Y = 2; // y coordinate of switch root prim
integer ADDRESS_Z = 3; // z coordinate of switch root prim

// Within the status field at least the following part is expected
// Future extensions will be delimeted by "."
integer STATUS = 0; // Text string of status

// Currently only the follow values for STATUS have been defined
string NAME_MAIN = "Main";
string NAME_BRANCH = "Branch";

//Witin the descriptions at least the following part is expected
//Future extensions will be delimeted by "."
integer CONNECTION_DESTINATION = 0; // Informal description of direction for this connection

//Witin the channel description field at least the following parts are expected, delimeted by "."
integer LOCAL_CHANNEL = 0; // channel for local control of the switch

// ===================================================================================
// Function GetDescriptionSubfield. Read one subfield of the switchstand description
// Returns a string with the requested subfield. Note that for fields that contains only a
// single item field and subfield are equivalent.
// ====================================================================================

string GetDescriptionSubfield(string sDescription, integer iField, integer iSubField)
{
// Compact version
return(llList2String(llParseString2List(llList2String(llParseString2List(sDescription, ["~"],[]), iField), ["."],[]), iSubField));

// Here is how this function is composed:
// list lFields = llParseString2List(sDescription, ["~"],[]); // get the main fields
// string sOneField = llList2String(lFields, iField); // pick the one we need
// list lSubfields = llParseString2List(sOneField, ["."],[]); // Get the subfields
// string sOneSubfield = llList2String(lSubfields, iSubField); // Pick the one we need
// return(sOneSubfield);
}

// ===================================================================================
// *** Main program ***
// We use the example script for the sensor event on the wikki as the basis of this demo
// Note that there are in principle more efficient ways to get the description string
// of the prim than a sensor (using messaging between swtiches). These methods are
// currently under development by the VRC
// ===================================================================================

// Sensor variables
float g_fRange; // in meters
float g_fArc; // in radial
float g_fSphere; // in radial

default
{
state_entry()
{
g_fSphere = PI; // look all around, not used in this demo
g_fArc = PI/4; // look forward, make cone as narrow as practical
g_fRange = 10; // 10 meter, dont scan more than you need
}

touch_start(integer numberDetected)
{
// We look for the switch stand (an active object)
llSensor(NAME_SWITCH, "", ACTIVE, g_fRange, g_fArc);
}

sensor (integer numberDetected)
{
// Note: in this example all variables are explicitly named and stored, in a real application
// this could be done more compact ( see for an example the code of GetDescriptionSubfield()
// For clarity we expand the string handling here.

string sDescription;
string sStatus;
string sRegion;
string sX;
string sY;
string sZ;
string sDestination;
string sChannel;

//prepare the response string, we start with a new line
string msg = "\n";

integer i = -1;
while(numberDetected > ++i) //loop trough all detected items
{
//First get the full description string of the detected switch
sDescription = (string)llGetObjectDetails( llDetectedKey(i), [OBJECT_DESC]);

// We extract the Region of this switch, the unique identifier x.y.z and the local channel number
// Note that it would be more convenient to have the location vector coordinates delimited by ","
// like in a standard vector. This would allow easier
// retrieval of the whole vector <x.y.z>

sRegion = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_REGION);
sX = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_X);
sY = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_Y);
sZ = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_ID, ADDRESS_Z);
sChannel = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_CHANNEL, LOCAL_CHANNEL);

//Look at the current status using the GetDescriptionSubfield function
sStatus = GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_STATUS, STATUS);

// Get the destination for the current setting
if (sStatus == NAME_MAIN)
{
sDestination=GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_MAIN, CONNECTION_DESTINATION);

}
else if(sStatus == NAME_BRANCH)
{
sDestination=GetDescriptionSubfield(sDescription, SLRR_SWITCH_DESC_BRANCH, CONNECTION_DESTINATION);
}

else
{
sDestination = "destination unknown (due to invalid status)";
}

msg += sRegion + " " + sX+ "," + sY + " using channel " + sChannel + " " + "is currently set for " + sDestination + "\n";
}
llWhisper(0, msg);
}

no_sensor()
{
llOwnerSay("No switch within viewing range");
}
}

Note that none of this is mandatory for a scripter. If sombody want to write quick and dirty code that works now, that is fine. However, the point is that such a script can not be expected to keep working in the future. Scripts using the techique outlined in the above example are guaranteed to work, even if additional info is added to the description string.

This priciple is more general than the switch standard example, and for ''all'' description strings a script should retrieve the info using indexes rather than asuming that no additonal info will ever be present.

[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 00:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T01:44:24Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Switch stand Prim/linkset parameters and changes and data string */

{{Help
|Avatar=
|Object=
|LandSim=
|Viewer=
|Community=
|Communication=
|Multimedia=
|Navigation=
|Wiki=
|Glossary=*
|Misc=*
|BugFixes=
|Disclaimer=
|OldInfo=
}}

{{hint
|mode=note
|desc=As with all wiki.secondlife pages that are not [[KB2Wiki#What_is_the_Linden_Lab_Official_namespace.3F | LL Official pages]], this article is open to edit as and when a resident feels it is appropriate (see [[Editing Guidelines]]). If however you simply wish to ask or make a suggestion about or discuss the railroad or the content of this article, please use the [[Talk:Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_Switch|Talk page]]. The talk page is also where any disputes over proposed page content should be discussed. This Wiki (being a document of an ever changing world) is constantly in need of updating and improvement. If you are aware of information this article should have added/changed please go ahead and do so. If you do not feel confident about editing make the suggestion on the talk page and another contributor may be able to assist.
}}

{|style="width: 100%; font-size: 100%; background: #ffffff; border:1px solid #c0c0c0;"
| align="left"|__TOC__
| <div align="center">
[[Image:Points_ani.gif‎|500px|center]]
</div>
|}
 
<div id="box">
==Description==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
The following page describes the working and standards used on the [[LDPW]] switch. The SLRR switch is part of the greater SLRR rail network and will be implemented over the next months.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Background information==

<div style="padding:0.5em">
On the Northern Continent (Heterocera Atoll) there are a few sections of railway line (see [[Second_Life_Railroad|SLRR Map]] ). Some are under construction and other are in full operation. The [[LDPW]] has started work to get the 'Branch lines' and 'Passing tracks' connected to each other. In order to do this a rail switch was designed by {{User2|Sylvan Mole}}.

The basis for the design of the switch was the concept; "''The switch should work for the greatest number of existing rolling stock''". For that reason the switch is design without active scripts inside the guide rail prims. Most of the parts of the switch are mostly cosmetics. The actual switching is done by changing the (invisible) center guide rail. This is done in such a way that physical trains as well as sensor driven train can use the switch. (see below for more details).

Some SL merchants already have made commercial version of a switch for the Guide rail available. Due to legal reasons the LDPW is not able to use these and therefor opted to make their own system.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Drawing==

<div style="padding:0.5em">
====Diagram of Switch parts====

[[File:Points_expl.png|600px|center|Drawing semi automated switch]]
* Guide rail (normally invisible but as example colored in)
*# white normal [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards#Standards|Guide rail]]
*# green normal Guide rail on the switch named "'''Guide'''" made '''not phantom''', in other words, made solid
*# red switched off Guide rail and renamed "'''Alternate Guide'''" and made '''phantom'''
* Switch stand
* Sensors
*# A for trains going down the main line, from the merge side toward the heading of the switch
*# B for trains going down the branch line, from the merge side toward the heading of the switch
* Touch start Prim to allow SL Residents to change the switch setting
* Dwarf Signal Lights

====Switch stand signaling diagram====

[[File:SLRR_Switch_Signaling_1024.png|600px|center|Drawing of Swtich stand signaling]]

</div></div>

<div id="box">

==System description==

<div style="padding:0.5em">

===Basics===

*A Guide rail in use (direction of travel, depicted in green)
prim attributes
- prim name: 'Guide'
- NOT phantom
- Material: Glass
- Texture: Transparent
*A Guide rail not in use (switched off, depicted in red)
prim attributes
- prim name: 'Alternate Guide'
- phantom
- Material: Glass
- Texture: Transparent
*Switch Stand Signal rotates 90deg. to reveal appropriate signal. It houses the main scripts that talk to the Guide rail sections as well as the train sensors A and B.
*Large invisible prim covering the Switch Stand to provide Touch start support (click-able switches)
*Sensors look straight up for 4 meters, sensing ACTIVE unflagged, with an arc as wide as the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards#SLRR_track_standards|Loading Gauge]]. If a train is detected it will automatically switch to the appropriate setting. However, If you go too fast into a merge they may miss detecting the train. As sensors fire only once per second.
*Dwarf Signal Lights on the Merge side of the switch display a Green or Red light. A green Dwarf Signal on the side of the merge you are on, means the switch is set correctly. A red Dwarf Signal on the side of the merge you are on, mean switch set incorrectly. Going on past a red light may cause trains to derail.

===Switch stand Prim/linkset parameters and changes and data string===

prim attributes
- prim name: 'Switch Stand'
- prim description: (see details below)
- phantom
- linked set: includes switch stand, touch prim and dwarf signals
- Texture: multiple
- Texture: full bright in parts

To provide touch support to each switch, there is a larger invisible cube placed over each switch (see drawing: purple box over the switch). 
Simply hover your mouse over the area and click. These are very large and part of the linkset of the Switch.

The Object Description of the Switch Stand root prim holds a data string. This data will make it possible for train builders to semi-automate trains / train routes, as well as get enough information to message switches appropriately. i.e. control switches by sending messages 'main' or 'branch' to it. 

String format -Identifier~Status~Heading Name~Mainline Name~Branch Name~messaging channel 
Format uses ~ to separate fields of data and "." to designate hierarchies within fields

Notation example:
SimName.x.y.z~Main~Heading~Mainline~branch~channel

Live example:
Tuliptree.30.42.30~Branch~Calleta Station~TulipTree Station~VRC Yard~133

explanation of the live example:
* The switch is located in Tuliptree/30/42/30 (the coordinates reflect the root prim of the Switch Stands position)
* It is currently set to the branch
* The heading side goes to Calleta Station
* The main side goes to Tuliptree Station
* The branch side goes to VRC Yard
* It listens and talks on channel 133

So in this example the switch is set to the branch line that links the VRC-Yard in Tuliptree to the Calleta Station.

If the switch was turned the other way (to mainline going straight ahead) it would read:
Tuliptree.30.42.30~Main~Calleta Station~TulipTree Station~VRC Yard~133

The data string changes only the Status field during normal operation. The 'Status' field will display "Main" or "Branch" for train builders/scripters to sense and react.

The standard for the data string currently specifies the minimal info that a script can expect, but it is unclear if the standard forbids that extra information is added (and it should not). For maximal flexibility indexes could be used to read the data string from the description. Changes to the future data string inside the switches may happen. It is wise to plan for that when creating scripts that sense switches remotely.

===System messaging===

*All switch systems message on a unique channel published in the Object Description of the switch stand linkset.
*All switch systems listen for the message "Main" OR(not and) "Branch" on appropriate channel.
*All switch systems [[llShout]] (100 meter) "Main" or "Branch" on the same channel once switch has completed changes.

This allows signal changes up to 100 meters further up and down line. Including communication between LDPW construct and private installations.

===Sensors and mainline resets===

*Each switch installed on a mainline will reset to the mainline position 2.5 minutes after it is put in the branch position.
*On the merge side of each switch are two sensors. One for each side of the merge. These effectively "Spring" the switch correctly for traffic heading into the merge. When tripped they messages the switch and set it to the correct position.
*The [[llSensor]] scripts are placed in a prim 1.0x0.5x0.5 meter always with the X axis looking straight up and positioned/rotated with the top of the sensor flush with the top of the guide.
*These sensors look straight up for 4 meters, sensing ACTIVE unflagged, with an arc as wide as the Loading Gauge. However, If you go too fast into a merge they may miss detecting the train, as the sensors fire only once per second.

</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Scripts==

<div style="padding:0.5em">

It is the intention of the LDPW to publish scripts used in the switch setup here in the future.
*I would like to publish the sensor code here, so everyone can verify that their trains are being sensed. Also i would like to post some code showing some examples of data wrangling from the Switch Stand Description.
*Once approved, actual Switch code will be placed here as well.(Sylvan Mole)

</div></div>

<div id="box">

==Source==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
The above information was provided by LDPW {{User2|Sylvan Mole}} and edited for the wiki by {{User2|Stryker Jenkins}}. Thank You very much Stryker! Information confirmed and minor edits added by {{User2|Sylvan Mole}}.
</div></div>

<div id="box">

==References==
<div style="padding:0.5em">
Here is a list of Related resources. You can find more information about the SLRR and other Rail related articles on these wiki pages and external websites.

Wiki pages:
* [[Second_Life_Railroad]] (main page)
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History|SLRR History]]
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_standards|SLRR Standards]]
* [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR Switch|SLRR Switch]]

* [[LDPW|Linden Department of Public Works]]
* [[Linden_Vehicle_Tutorial]]

* [[Virtual_Railway_Consortium]] Group wiki page
* [[Virtual_Railway_Consortium/SLRR_History]] SLRR History main page compiled by the VRC
* [[Virtual_Railway_Consortium/SLRR_Stations]] SLRR and Resident station along the SLRR

External information:
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge Wikipedia: Rail gauge]
* [http://lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=physics Physics related LSL on LSLwiki.net]
* [http://lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=vehicles Vehicle related LSL on LSLwiki.net]
* [http://www.virtualrailwayconsortium.org/ Virtual Railway Consortium]
</div></div>

[[Category:SL_Railroad]]

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T01:35:13Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A script header for this specification might look like this: */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T01:28:09Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A more exact specification of the reading of the description string in the switch stand is needed. */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T01:24:29Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A more exact specification of the description string in the switch stand is needed. */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T01:09:29Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Proposed text to be put up in the page: */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-07T00:59:21Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A script header for this specification might look like this: */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-06T23:20:23Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A more exact specification of the description string in the switch stand is needed. */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-06T10:51:13Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A script header for this specification might look like this: */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-06T10:44:55Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A more exact specification of the description string in the switch stand is needed. */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-06T00:49:59Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* A more exact specification of the description string in the switch stand is needed. */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR Switch

2011-01-06T00:45:13Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* problem about being noob proof */

Talk:Second Life Railroad

2010-09-12T11:47:52Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Content editing and removal */

{{talk}}
== Page integrity ==

For some reason {{User2|Jer Straaf}} feels it is needed to give the users only access to his point of view on these pages. I am removing the images and content I created for these pages, and do '''NO LONGER ALLOW ANYONE TO USE THEM''' on the Second Life Wiki. As of now 6 September 2010 the page integrity has been compromised and should been seen as grieving propaganda from {{User2|Jer Straaf}}, {{User2|Yevad_Doobie}} and {{User2|DOUGIE_Flossberg}}.[[User:Stryker Jenkins]] 06:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The statement made here by Stryker is untrue. He has given no specific examples because there are none. 
Unless my changes have been un-done again, this wiki article is now clear, concise and well organized. With the exception of the VRC advertisements, it is also objective. 
Please look at this article and form your own opinion. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 02:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
 
 
Erm, propaganda? You published tarnished approximations of 2 of my established brand names in SL on the wiki page without even consulting me, which I have since asked you to remove. If you had consulted me you would have received a flat refusal as I do not want my brands associated with this page for a number of reasons. Now I see a slanderous statement about me at the top of this page, which I am taking on its pathetic face value at this moment...[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 

== Content editing and removal ==

"''who are we to decide what goes and what stays''"... As long as information is not out of date or proven to be wrong information should stay as it is and not be needlessly removed. This is for the benefit of '''all viewers''' of the SLRR main wiki page. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
If the information is about Linden Labs' SLRR, is objective and is factual, it stays. If it is off-topic, biased or self-serving, it goes. It's that easy, Stryker, everyone except you gets that. 
Yevad Doobie has even filed a support ticket to have his entry removed from the "SLRR Stations" list. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Removal of "SLRR Station" would be counter productive and self serving. Certainly not in the best interest of the SL users who want this information. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
: This is a "straw man fallacy" Stryker, nobody is proposing that the section be removed. Most residents use classified ads and work hard to build popularity and traffic for better search results, etc. The rest of us are playing Second Life, what game are you playing? [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 
We seem to have a working solution for the problems with this page, but there are a few open ends that i think should be fixed.
The current page text says about the SLRR:
 
"Some residents feel it is completely unnecessary, some residents believe that it should remain free and open for use by all residents, others have tried to control and restrict usage of the SLRR. Some residents believe that the LDPW shows favoritism towards one particular SL railroading group." 
This text is a left over of the past wiki war. I do not think is provides a very inviting introduction to the SLRR. For sure we must be able to do better on the front page. My suggestion is that we have a short dicussion here to find a format acceptable to all, that is a bit more positive. Any takers? [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 11:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== Linden word on the subject ;) ==

I'm the Linden responsible for community-facing stuff on this wiki, so I hope this clarifies:

Okay, first, Jer, it helps to not type in ALL CAPS. That looks like shouting and has the unfortunate effects of provoking anger.

Second, '''this isn't Wikipedia, we don't enforce NPOV like they do'''. Sometimes NPOV is useful, ''but'' many articles are ''expected'' to have subjective bias based on real experiences, which can turn a dry read into something more vivid and useful — especially when it comes to culture. (We're more like [http://tvtropes.org/ TVTropes] that way.) However, we're ''always'' subject to the Second Life Terms of Service here, so inflammatory behavior that violates that isn't cool.

'''[[Editing_Guidelines#Linking_of_Content|''It's fine'' to list related pages]] towards the end of an article. This is ''not'' out of scope. Linden Lab ''encourages'' connecting related ideas.''' On help pages, you often see this as "See also" or "Related resources". (This is common on Wikipedia as well.) The point is to provide broader context without diluting the article's focus. Without those links, most Residents would be at a loss as to where to go next — in this case, to find out about other railroads. So, it's alright to list "Other Railway initiatives", and I see some of these initiatives already have their own pages. That's the right thing to do, and that's great!

Hopefully railroad factions who aren't yet included will be inspired to make the listing more comprehensive.

What ''would'' be beyond the scope of this article? As an example, ''if'' other railway initiative descriptions began to take up multiple paragraphs and dominate the article — then those should be moved to other pages too. Again, I emphasize: '''simple links are good'''.

Carry on, ''choo-choo!''

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 4:58 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting comments from 11:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC) to Jer and Torley --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

 

:: This text-brawl needs to end now for everyone involved. I've given Jer Straaf a warning due to unuseful, inflammatory rambling which doesn't constructively followup on my earlier comments. Remember that there are ''many'' external places where dissenting opinions can be raised. This wiki, however, is owned by Linden Lab. {{TorSig}} on 2010-09-02 @ 9:19 AM Pacific

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-08T09:15:51Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

== I haven't forgotten about this... ==

but, pardon for my delayed response, because my attention has been focused on critical deadlines here at Linden Lab. I will say this:

* Talk pages can be an awkward place to have a conversation. As suggested, maybe some of you need to discuss this in realtime.
* I lack extensive firsthand experience with the disputed SLRR (and related) events, so I don't have a strong stance on matters as it relates to official Linden policy, compared to something in my domain expertise. So I forwarded this to Michael Linden of the [[LDPW]]. To clarify, I'm unable to meaningfully mediate beyond broad wiki guidelines, but will make sure those are followed, or offenders' wiki edit privileges will be revoked.
* If there continues to still be conflict over what belongs in a single page and consensus can't be reached, I recommend that '''''new'' pages with their own perspective should be created''', all linked reciprocally so that visitors can read them and make up their own minds. That way, each of the different groups involved in this can present their side of the story without feeling trampled. But "edit warring" must stop.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-07 @ 9:19 AM Pacific

:Awesomness!-- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 20:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
:Thank you Torley. This is a process, not a crisis. When all this talk fades away we will be left with a great article. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list of facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I edited for brevity and did not change any essential informational content in the process. But Stryker has been busy again: 
- I count known train sales and correctly say that "thousands of residents have personal trains" and for some reason Stryker edits it and says "very many trains." Why? 
- Standards have existed for several years and Stryker incorrectly states that standard-setting began at a meeting last month. I take it out, he puts it back in. 
- I take out the VRC's blatant advertising, Stryker puts it back in. I make a place for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" and Stryker deletes it. 
<strike>- The "SLRR logo" is a picture of one of Stryker's products on [https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Marketplace&file=item&ItemID=1569050 SLX] and is not something you would ever find on the SLRR. </strike> Images removed by --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Stop editing my comments! Make your own! [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC) These are normal Wiki procedures Jer.--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
And his map? It is biased, out-of-date and speculative. 
- Stryker keeps manipulating the "Source" sections too, the VRC did not "initially collect" this widely available public information, I have been distributing some of it for years. And who are these "and
others associated with other SLRR related groups" to which Stryker refers? My contributions were not made representing any SL group! What is your agenda here? And Michael Linden is only a source for the names of
the rail lines? Get real. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 09:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
 

I recommend that Stryker and Jer meet inworld (along with any and all interested parties) to discuss how best to work together on this material. It would seem the only way a meeting could be productive is if a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman chair] was employed. The chair should be someone who has no bias. Do the wiki a favor and consider this suggestion seriously, please. -- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 13:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have reattached the 2010 history text to its proper place. 
Stryker, do not use my railroading locations as "points of interest" to justify putting your VRC advertisements into the list of SLRR stations. ONLY official LL stations should appear in the list! 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Wew, things move fast here, i was am only half way trough my list of proposed edits. What happend to talking in the talk page to reach consensus? :(
I don't think a chair is needed , just common sense and good manners should do. I will complete my suggested changes - with justification for each modification, and put that up for discussion. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
: I change my mind. So much of the page has been removed that the task of restoring it -given the current atmosphere- is daunting. I prefer to spend my time in more productive ways. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 21:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
:: Sorry Vaughn, I don't buy that. I think you looked at it and realized that all I removed was a bunch of extraneous detail that puffed up the article. Storming off in a huff is a way of "saving face" for your VRC, you know it was all just poorly-written cut/paste fluff. I was hoping you would help us. JMHO...[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
 
:::It is supposed to be fun to do this, that was not the case anymore, and your comment above is a prefect illustration of that. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-08T06:38:36Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

== I haven't forgotten about this... ==

but, pardon for my delayed response, because my attention has been focused on critical deadlines here at Linden Lab. I will say this:

* Talk pages can be an awkward place to have a conversation. As suggested, maybe some of you need to discuss this in realtime.
* I lack extensive firsthand experience with the disputed SLRR (and related) events, so I don't have a strong stance on matters as it relates to official Linden policy, compared to something in my domain expertise. So I forwarded this to Michael Linden of the [[LDPW]]. To clarify, I'm unable to meaningfully mediate beyond broad wiki guidelines, but will make sure those are followed, or offenders' wiki edit privileges will be revoked.
* If there continues to still be conflict over what belongs in a single page and consensus can't be reached, I recommend that '''''new'' pages with their own perspective should be created''', all linked reciprocally so that visitors can read them and make up their own minds. That way, each of the different groups involved in this can present their side of the story without feeling trampled. But "edit warring" must stop.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-07 @ 9:19 AM Pacific

:Awesomness!-- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 20:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
:Thank you Torley. This is a process, not a crisis. When all this talk fades away we will be left with a great article. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list of facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I edited for brevity and did not change any essential informational content in the process. But Stryker has been busy again: 
- I count known train sales and correctly say that "thousands of residents have personal trains" and for some reason Stryker edits it and says "very many trains." Why? 
- Standards have existed for several years and Stryker incorrectly states that standard-setting began at a meeting last month. I take it out, he puts it back in. 
- I take out the VRC's blatant advertising, Stryker puts it back in. I make a place for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" and Stryker deletes it. 
<strike>- The "SLRR logo" is a picture of one of Stryker's products on [https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Marketplace&file=item&ItemID=1569050 SLX] and is not something you would ever find on the SLRR. </strike> Images removed by --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Stop editing my comments! Make your own! [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC) These are normal Wiki procedures Jer.--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
And his map? It is biased, out-of-date and speculative. 
- Stryker keeps manipulating the "Source" sections too, the VRC did not "initially collect" this widely available public information, I have been distributing some of it for years. And who are these "and
others associated with other SLRR related groups" to which Stryker refers? My contributions were not made representing any SL group! What is your agenda here? And Michael Linden is only a source for the names of
the rail lines? Get real. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 09:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
 

I recommend that Stryker and Jer meet inworld (along with any and all interested parties) to discuss how best to work together on this material. It would seem the only way a meeting could be productive is if a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman chair] was employed. The chair should be someone who has no bias. Do the wiki a favor and consider this suggestion seriously, please. -- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 13:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have reattached the 2010 history text to its proper place. 
Stryker, do not use my railroading locations as "points of interest" to justify putting your VRC advertisements into the list of SLRR stations. ONLY official LL stations should appear in the list! 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Wew, things move fast here, i was am only half way trough my list of proposed edits. What happend to talking in the talk page to reach consensus? :(
I don't think a chair is needed , just common sense and good manners should do. I will complete my suggested changes - with justification for each modification, and put that up for discussion. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
: I change my mind. So much of the page has been removed that the task of restoring it -given the current atmosphere- is daunting. I prefer to spend my time in more productive ways. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 21:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
:: Sorry Vaughn, I don't buy that. I think you looked at it and realized that all I removed was a bunch of extraneous detail that puffed up the article. Storming off in a huff is a way of "saving face" for your VRC, you know it was all just poorly-written cut/paste fluff. I was hoping you would help us. JMHO...[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 
 
:::It is supposed to be fun to do this, that was not the case anymore. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-07T21:01:56Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

== I haven't forgotten about this... ==

but, pardon for my delayed response, because my attention has been focused on critical deadlines here at Linden Lab. I will say this:

* Talk pages can be an awkward place to have a conversation. As suggested, maybe some of you need to discuss this in realtime.
* I lack extensive firsthand experience with the disputed SLRR (and related) events, so I don't have a strong stance on matters as it relates to official Linden policy, compared to something in my domain expertise. So I forwarded this to Michael Linden of the [[LDPW]]. To clarify, I'm unable to meaningfully mediate beyond broad wiki guidelines, but will make sure those are followed, or offenders' wiki edit privileges will be revoked.
* If there continues to still be conflict over what belongs in a single page and consensus can't be reached, I recommend that '''''new'' pages with their own perspective should be created''', all linked reciprocally so that visitors can read them and make up their own minds. That way, each of the different groups involved in this can present their side of the story without feeling trampled. But "edit warring" must stop.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-07 @ 9:19 AM Pacific

:Awesomness!-- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 20:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list of facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I edited for brevity and did not change any essential informational content in the process. But Stryker has been busy again: 
- I count known train sales and correctly say that "thousands of residents have personal trains" and for some reason Stryker edits it and says "very many trains." Why? 
- Standards have existed for several years and Stryker incorrectly states that standard-setting began at a meeting last month. I take it out, he puts it back in. 
- I take out the VRC's blatant advertising, Stryker puts it back in. I make a place for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" and Stryker deletes it. 
<strike>- The "SLRR logo" is a picture of one of Stryker's products on [https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Marketplace&file=item&ItemID=1569050 SLX] and is not something you would ever find on the SLRR. </strike> Images removed by --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Stop editing my comments! Make your own! [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC) These are normal Wiki procedures Jer.--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
And his map? It is biased, out-of-date and speculative. 
- Stryker keeps manipulating the "Source" sections too, the VRC did not "initially collect" this widely available public information, I have been distributing some of it for years. And who are these "and
others associated with other SLRR related groups" to which Stryker refers? My contributions were not made representing any SL group! What is your agenda here? And Michael Linden is only a source for the names of
the rail lines? Get real. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 09:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
 

I recommend that Stryker and Jer meet inworld (along with any and all interested parties) to discuss how best to work together on this material. It would seem the only way a meeting could be productive is if a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman chair] was employed. The chair should be someone who has no bias. Do the wiki a favor and consider this suggestion seriously, please. -- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 13:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have reattached the 2010 history text to its proper place. 
Stryker, do not use my railroading locations as "points of interest" to justify putting your VRC advertisements into the list of SLRR stations. ONLY official LL stations should appear in the list! 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Wew, things move fast here, i was am only half way trough my list of proposed edits. What happend to talking in the talk page to reach consensus? :(
I don't think a chair is needed , just common sense and good manners should do. I will complete my suggested changes - with justification for each modification, and put that up for discussion. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
: I change my mind. So much of the page has been removed that the task of restoring it -given the current atmosphere- is daunting. I prefer to spend my time in more productive ways. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 21:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-07T06:53:32Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list of facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I edited for brevity and did not change any essential informational content in the process. But Stryker has been busy again: 
- I count known train sales and correctly say that "thousands of residents have personal trains" and for some reason Stryker edits it and says "very many trains." Why? 
- Standards have existed for several years and Stryker incorrectly states that standard-setting began at a meeting last month. I take it out, he puts it back in. 
- I take out the VRC's blatant advertising, Stryker puts it back in. I make a place for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" and Stryker deletes it. 
<strike>- The "SLRR logo" is a picture of one of Stryker's products on [https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Marketplace&file=item&ItemID=1569050 SLX] and is not something you would ever find on the SLRR. </strike> Images removed by --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Stop editing my comments! Make your own! [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC) These are normal Wiki procedures Jer.--[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
And his map? It is biased, out-of-date and speculative. 
- Stryker keeps manipulating the "Source" sections too, the VRC did not "initially collect" this widely available public information, I have been distributing some of it for years. And who are these "and
others associated with other SLRR related groups" to which Stryker refers? My contributions were not made representing any SL group! What is your agenda here? And Michael Linden is only a source for the names of
the rail lines? Get real. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 09:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 
 

I recommend that Stryker and Jer meet inworld (along with any and all interested parties) to discuss how best to work together on this material. It would seem the only way a meeting could be productive is if a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman chair] was employed. The chair should be someone who has no bias. Do the wiki a favor and consider this suggestion seriously, please. -- '''[[User:Fred_Gandt|Fred Gandt]]''' ([[User talk:Fred_Gandt|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fred_Gandt|contribs]]) 13:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have reattached the 2010 history text to its proper place. 
Stryker, do not use my railroading locations as "points of interest" to justify putting your VRC advertisements into the list of SLRR stations. ONLY official LL stations should appear in the list! 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 22:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Wew, things move fast here, i was am only half way trough my list of proposed edits. What happend to talking in the talk page to reach consensus? :(
I don't think a chair is needed , just common sense and good manners should do. I will complete my suggested changes - with justification for each modification, and put that up for discussion. [[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 06:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-06T09:42:01Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list of facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-06T09:41:26Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed listof facts that are in my view on topic, so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-06T04:32:08Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

{{talk}}

==Moving page==

I have moved the [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|SLRR History from 2010 and beyond]] to this [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History_2010|new page]]. 2005 to 2009 can still be found at [[Second_Life_Railroad/SLRR_History]]. The old page gotten larger than the 32K maximum. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 
 
To Stryker, this is not a good idea, the history must remain on a single page. 
It is long because it was not written succinctly, some text was copied/pasted in it's entirety and not edited down for this wiki topic. 
The only headings needed are "2008" etc., a subheadings for every item is not necessary. 
Your suggestion to "find the latest SLRR information on the history 2010 page" makes absolutely no sense. 
Also, there is no such thing as a "history beyond the present." Up to date information should be placed on the SLRR main topic page only. 
Would you like to change it back to the way it was? or shall I... 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 10:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* For editing purposes it's much easier to use sub-headings. So I suggest to keep those. Seeing as the documents will be added to continually it probably wise to split them at some point in time anyway. I could reverse the order of the document... but to be honest that makes no sense to me. You start a book by reading from chapter 1. Not from the last chapter backward. Lets leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 10:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
You have not presented any valid reasoning in support of this horrible change and you have obviously not understood my sound reasoning for returning the history to a single page format. 
I will contact Torley Linden immediately, he can adjudicate this matter. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 11:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:* Reasoning in a nutshell again then: 1). The wiki editor if self gives a warning when a page gets larger then 32K. 2). The subheadings are needed for ease of editing and the index. 3). Pages are written and read from the top down and clearly marked they continue on other pages. 4) I have immediately accommodated your 'concern' by adding additional links in the description of both pages. 
:* I agree with the fact there is no "history beyond the present". So you may want to come up with a better term for that. The pages are now fully linked and reverting it will cause links on other pages to fail. And just because you want something does not mean that I automatically have to agree. I still think its best to leave the pages as they are arranged now. --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
I have edited the entire article for conciseness, eliminating extraneous information and creating a place in "Other Railway Initiatives" for the VRC-specific information as Torley has suggested. 
The article looks really good now and contains all of the public information about the SLRR. 
I spent a lot of time on this initially and have now spent even more making the article readable and more objective. Do not undo any of these changes without consulting Torley Linden. 
The "history of the future" page that Stryker Jenkins created can now be easily placed back into its proper place on the SLRR History page. 
[[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 00:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 
jer Straaf had me look at this streamlined version and it looks really good. The old version was too long and too confusing plus it was not objective. All of the important information is still there. I contributed information to the original article and I am the founder of the largest railroad group in Second Life, the SLRR Rail Group. I have railroad stations all over the SLRR and agree that it is not right to list them under the topic "Second Life Railroad." Moundsa and Stryker need to stop pretending that they own the SLRR in world and that they own this wiki topic, we ALL own it. Jer has done more for personal railroading and "saving the rails" than almost anybody, his input should be respected. To Stryker, I saw the games you played with the edits, do not remove this message without my permission! [[User:DOUGIE Flossberg|DOUGIE Flossberg]] 04:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
: I tend to disagree, its unclear to me why large portions with good factual information have been removed. I agree with Torley, could you and Jer detail the reasons behind the changes, in particular the larger deletes?[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 19:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vaughn, Which parts do you agree with if you only "tend" to disagree? Please re-read my comments, it's all there. Your VRC group's leadership has begun putting your VRC advertisements back into the article already and have deleted the category I made for the VRC in "Other Railway Initiatives" in opposition to what Torley suggested. This is a citizenship issue with your VRC, yet again. ONLY official SLRR stations should be listed here. VRC railroad stations are no more official than any other resident-built stations, and there are hundreds of resident-built stations along the SLRR. [[User:Jer Straaf|Jer Straaf]] 23:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 
Objectivity is paramount surely? Why are some resident locations so shamelessly plugged? This page should not be used in such a manner I would say, unless maybe someone wants to canvas all neighbours along the SLRR...slrr-yellowpages.com is available to anyone who wishes to set something up along those lines. I can see the logic in maybe mentioning landmarks such as the hobo area, crossings, that kind of thing, but I also feel that such detail would be better elsewhere and this page is best when concise, clear and a starting point for further information and investigation. Use of all of the protected routes is mostly about peoples need to explore and find things for themselves, the page should be a good starting point, not a good reason to minimise the client, grab a drink, and put your reading glasses on. May I quote 5 simple words which may also help? What, where, when, how, why.[[User:Yevad Doobie|Yevad Doobie]] 03:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ok, this gets us nowhere, much more has been removed than justified. I will compile a detailed list facts that are n my view on topic so we know what we are talking about .[[User:Vaughn Deluca|Vaughn Deluca]] 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== For simplicity's sake... ==

@Jer It isn't clear to me which specific passages you find objectionable. I won't assume and I don't have the luxury of time to look through all edits, so please quote and summarize with ''specific actionables''. Otherwise, others have a hard time understanding what you mean.

Since there's a lot going on here, it may help to start fresh knowing that: ''alternate views'' can be presented within an article from each perspective. For example, "While Bob saw the burgeoning steampunk movement as important to e-commerce, Alice disagreed because it hurt her dieselpunk fashions. Complicating the matter further, John saw an opportunity to merge the two."

The point is, '''attribute these perspectives, and make it clear they aren't universally shared'''. Similar to how Wikipedia has both "positive", "negative", and "mixed" reviews cited in the "critical response" of movie reviews — [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_%28film%29#Critical_response ''Inception''] is a particularly weighty example.

{{TorSig}} on 2010-09-01 @ 5:29 AM Pacific

 

:* retracting older comments --[[User:Stryker Jenkins|Stryker J]] 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-05T19:31:46Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-05T19:30:18Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

Talk:Second Life Railroad/SLRR History

2010-09-05T19:29:32Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Moving page */

Project:Languages

2007-09-08T12:53:42Z

Vaughn Deluca: /* Page titles */

= Language Guidelines for SL wiki =

This page discusses the guidelines on natural language uses and content translation of SL wiki (http://wiki.secondlife.com).

At this moment, the contents on this page is just a set of proposals. Please feel free to have discussions on the [[Project talk:Languages|associated discussion page]] or simply modify this page. It is expected, however, that in a future entire contents of SL wiki follow the revised guidelies on this page. If you are changing existing practices, someone needs to rewrite existing pages to follow the new rule.

So, if you have something to say on this issue, please start soon!

= General =

SL wiki generally follows the idea and mechanisms of [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Language_policy MediaWiki site's language policy on Help pages], as opposed to that for [http://www.wikipedia.org Wikipedia]'s language versions.

= Creating pages =

== Primary Language ==

English is the primary language of SL wiki.

English is chosen because it is the most common language in international communication today. it is not to give privilege to native English speakers. So, even if you are very good at English, please assume that readers are not fluent in English and use plain simple wording.

You may use foreign words or phrases in English sentences if it is needed. However, please avoid gentility uses of Latin, Greek or French.

== Page titles ==

The title of a page in SL wiki should be based on English.

Although MediaWiki is powerful enough to allow non-English titles (i.e., use of any Unicode characters), SL wiki will not use the feature.

== Non English contents ==

If you want to create a new page in non-English language, please consider to write it in two languages; one is English and another in your non-English language, making English page a primary page and the non-English page a [[#Translation|translation]]. The English page need not be complete in this case. Just a brief summary is OK.

Even if you are not willing or lack enough skills to write the page in English, it is recommended to create an almost empty ''English'' page that only says something like "The content of this page is not available in English for the moment", and write your non-English page as a ''translation''.

This way, other residents can eventually translate your contents into English without changing entire page structures.

= Translation =

It is welcome to translate pages on SL wiki into other languages.

== Page titles ==

Translated contents are written in its own page.

The title of the translated page should be its corresponding English page title plus a code for a language, separated by a slash (/). For example, Dutch translation of the [[Main Page]] is titled [[Main Page/nl]], as opposed to '''Hoofdpagina''' or '''Hoofdpagina/nl''', where '''nl''' is the language code for Dutch. See [[#Language codes|Language code]] below for possible codes.

Language code is all in lower case.

== Languages Template ==

Translated pages should be tagged with the [[Template:Languages|<nowiki>{{Languages}}</nowiki> template]]. English pages that have one or more translation should also. The <nowiki>{{Languages}}</nowiki> template should be put near the top of the page and kept at the same location in translations of the same page.

Consistent use of <nowiki>{{Languages}}</nowiki> template helps readers to find their preferred language versions of pages.

== Links ==

If you are linking to another page from a non-English page, and the target page has a translation of the same language, it's better to link to the translated page. Such links are better to have translated anchor.

For example, if you are writing a French page, and want to put a link to the French translated version of the page titled '''Voice''', It's better to write the link as <code><nowiki>[[Voice/fr|voix]]</nowiki></code> then to write <code><nowiki>[[Voice/fr]]</nowiki></code>.

Yes, this is somewhat inconveninent side-effect of the above guideline, that is, page title is always English based. (Express your opinions on the [[Project talk:Languages|discussion]] page.)

If the target page has no translation to the same language, link to the primary (English) page.

== Synchronization ==

Try to synchronize the contents of the translated page with the corresponding English page, though you, as a translator, have no duty to track the changes to the original page. Any residents who noticed the change are encouraged to update the translation.

Adding new info only on the translated page is hence dangerous, because some other resident may remove the addition to ''synchronize'' the contents. You need some clear indication if you add some.

= Language Codes =

SL wiki uses ISO 639-1 (alpha-2) codes for language identification.

If translation to a language not included in 639-1 would be added in a future, we will use ISO 639-2 (alpha-3) codes for the language, keeping id for 639-1 covered languages as-is.

(See [[Project talk:Languages|discussion page]] for this point.)

== List of language codes ==

As of this writing, the following language codes are used in SL wiki. The list will expand time-to-time.

{| border="1" cellspacing="0"
!Code!!Language
|-
|de||German
|-
|es||Spanish
|-
|fr||French
|-
|it||Italian
|-
|ja||Japanese
|-
|nl||Dutch
|-
|pt||Portuguese
|-
|zh||Chinese
|}

Note that an English page has no language code attached, so SL wiki doesn't use the code "en".