EN 12896:2006

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-junij-2006
1DGRPHãþD
SIST ENV 12896:2003
&HVWQDWUDQVSRUWQDLQSURPHWQDWHOHPDWLND±-DYQLSUHYR]±5HIHUHQþQLSRGDWNRYQL
PRGHO
Road transport and traffic telematics - Public transport - Reference data model
Straßentransport- und Verkehrstelematik - Öffentlicher Transport - Datenreferenzmodell
Télématique de la circulation et du transport routier - Transports publics - Modele de
données
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 12896:2006
ICS:
35.240.60 Uporabniške rešitve IT v IT applications in transport
transportu in trgovini and trade
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

EUROPEAN STANDARD
EN 12896
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
March 2006
ICS 35.240.60 Supersedes ENV 12896:1997
English Version
Road transport and traffic telematics - Public transport -
Reference data model
Télématique de la circulation et du transport routier - Straßentransport- und Verkehrstelematik - Öffentlicher
Transports publics - Modèle de données Transport - Datenreferenzmodell
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 3 February 2006.
CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European
Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national
standards may be obtained on application to the Central Secretariat or to any CEN member.
This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation
under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the Central Secretariat has the same status as the official
versions.
CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION
EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
Management Centre: rue de Stassart, 36  B-1050 Brussels
© 2006 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. EN 12896:2006: E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
Foreword.6
Use of the Transmodel standard.6
Transmodel origins.6
ENV 12896.6
Titan 7
SITP and SITP2.7
CEN TC 278 WG 3 SG 4 .7
Structure of this European Standard.7
Conformance.8
Future developments.9
Introduction .10
Rationale for the Transmodel standard.10
Use of the Transmodel standard.10
Applicability of the Transmodel standard.11
Introduction .11
Specification of information architecture.11
Specification of a database .11
Specification of an interface.12
Status of the Transmodel standard .12
1 Scope .13
1.1 General.13
1.2 Overview.13
1.3 Network description .14
1.4 Versions, validity and layers .14
1.5 Tactical planning: Vehicle-Driver Scheduling and Rostering .14
1.6 Personnel disposition .15
1.7 Operations monitoring and control .15
1.8 Passenger information.16
1.9 Fare collection.16
1.10 Management information .17
1.11 Multi-modal operation .17
1.12 Multiple operators' environment .18
2 Terms and definitions .18
3 Requirements.20
3.1 General.20
3.1.1 Introduction.20
3.1.2 Modelling Style.21
3.1.3 Generic Approach and Abstract Views .21
3.1.4 Structures .22
3.2 Description of the Network .26
3.2.1 Elements of topology .26
3.2.2 Infrastructure Description.32
3.2.3 Restrictions .35
3.2.4 Combined Diagram on Topology .37
3.2.5 Additional Aspects to Point.39
3.2.6 Generic Network Concepts.43
3.2.7 Combined Diagram on Generic Network Concepts .49
3.2.8 Network Linear Features.50
3.2.9 Combined Diagram on Network Linear Features .60
3.2.10 Projection .61
3.2.11 Interface to the GDF Data Model. 66
3.3 Versions, Validity and Layers . 67
3.3.1 Introduction. 67
3.3.2 General Principles . 67
3.3.3 Main Concepts . 68
3.3.4 Version Frames. 69
3.3.5 Versions. 70
3.3.6 Other Aspects . 73
3.3.7 Combined Diagram on Versions. 74
3.3.8 Explicit Versions. 74
3.4 Tactical Planning Components. 76
3.4.1 Days . 76
3.4.2 Journeys. 79
3.4.3 Standard Times. 84
3.4.4 Journey Times . 88
3.4.5 Driver Trips . 90
3.4.6 Interchanges . 90
3.4.7 Timing Computation of a Journey . 93
3.5 Vehicle Scheduling. 94
3.5.1 Tactical Resource Planning . 94
3.5.2 Resources for Tactical Planning. 94
3.5.3 Vehicle Planning. 95
3.5.4 Vehicle Requirements. 97
3.6 Driver Scheduling. 99
3.6.1 General Remarks . 99
3.6.2 Duties. 100
3.6.3 Other Aspects of Duties. 105
3.7 Schedules and Versions. 107
3.7.1 Introduction. 107
3.7.2 Main Types of Schedules and Versions. 109
3.7.3 Combined Schedules and Versions . 111
3.8 Rostering. 112
3.8.1 General Remarks . 112
3.8.2 Roster Matrices. 113
3.8.3 Roster Cycles. 115
3.8.4 Roster Designs . 115
3.8.5 Roster Assignments. 116
3.9 Personnel Disposition. 117
3.9.1 Introduction. 117
3.9.2 Driver Assignments. 118
3.9.3 Driver Accounting . 121
3.10 Operations monitoring and control . 125
3.10.1 Introduction. 125
3.10.2 Dated Operational Plans. 126
3.10.3 Resource Detection and Monitoring. 130
3.10.4 Vehicle Assignments . 134
3.10.5 Monitored Operations . 135
3.10.6 Control Actions. 138
3.10.7 Events. 143
3.10.8 Messages. 144
3.11 Passenger Information. 145
3.11.1 Introduction. 145
3.11.2 Provision of Information. 145
3.11.3 Spatial Information . 148
3.11.4 Timetable Information. 151
3.11.5 Passenger Trip Planning . 156
3.11.6 Estimation of Trip Duration . 160
3.11.7 Other Information . 163
3.12 Fare Collection. 164
3.12.1 Introduction.164
3.12.2 Access Rights Specification.166
3.12.3 Fare Structure .171
3.12.4 Fare Products.174
3.12.5 Limiting Fare Parameters.175
3.12.6 Travel Documents.179
3.12.7 Sales.181
3.12.8 Customers .183
3.12.9 Prices .184
3.12.10 Pre-consumption Specification.186
3.12.11 Controls and Validation .188
3.12.12 Fare Version .191
3.12.13 Information on Fares .191
3.13 Management Information .191
3.13.1 Introduction.191
3.13.2 Service Journey Performance.193
3.13.3 Recorded Use of Services .196
3.14 Multi-modal Operation in Public Transport.198
3.14.1 Domain Definition and Limits.198
3.14.2 Network Description.199
3.14.3 Resource Management .202
3.14.4 Vehicle Coupling.204
3.14.5 Operations .206
3.14.6 Other Aspects .207
3.15 Multiple Operators' Environment .207
3.15.1 Introduction.207
3.15.2 Owners and Users of Resources and Network.208
3.15.3 Information from Different Sources.212
3.15.4 Interchanges.214
3.15.5 Fare Collection Functions.214
Annex A (normative) Data Definitions and Main Properties .215
A.1 This Annex.215
Annex B (informative) Additional features of the model .269
B.1 Consistency and Integrity Conditions.269
B.1.1 Introduction.269
B.1.2 Logical Constraints .271
B.1.3 Semantic Constraints.276
B.1.4 Optional Constraints .277
B.2 Introduction to Data Modelling and the Methodology Used .278
B.2.1 Introduction.278
B.2.2 Levels of model.278
B.2.3 Examples of Different Relationships .280
B.2.4 The Reason for Data Modelling.288
B.2.5 Optimisation and the Optimised Logical Model .295
B.2.6 Subtypes.295
B.2.7 Further Notation.297
B.3 Functional Model .298
B.3.1 Introduction.298
B.3.2 Functional Model .302
B.3.3 Definition of Functional Areas.309
Annex C (informative) Changes in this version of Transmodel.316
C.1 Changes between ENV 12896 (Transmodel 4.1) and Transmodel 5.0.316
C.1.1 Introduction.316
C.1.2 Impact of the changes on the entities .317
C.1.3 Impact of the changes on the diagram.332
C.2 Modifications to V5.0 leading to V5.1 .334
C.2.1 Introduction.334
C.2.2 How to read this Annex.334
C.2.3 Requests and proposed modifications. 335
Annex D (informative) Transmodel in UML. 365
D.1 Introduction. 365
D.1.1 General . 365
D.1.2 Differences between the two representations. 365
D.1.3 Structure of this Annex. 365
D.2 Class diagrams . 367
D.2.1 Network description . 367
D.2.2 Versions, validity and layers . 385
D.2.3 Tactical planning components. 390
D.2.4 Vehicle scheduling . 395
D.2.5 Driver scheduling . 397
D.2.6 Schedules and versions . 399
D.2.7 Rostering. 400
D.2.8 Personnel disposition. 402
D.2.9 Operations monitoring and control . 403
D.2.10 Passenger information. 410
D.2.11 Fare collection . 415
D.2.12 Management information. 420
D.2.13 Multi-modal operation in public transport . 422
D.2.14 Multiple operators' environment. 425
D.3 Class dictionary. 427
D.4 Generalisations and specialisations . 638
D.4.1 Specialisations descent. 638
D.4.2 Generalisations climb up. 642
D.5 Comparison of notations. 650
D.5.1 Relationships/Associations. 651
Bibliography. 655

Foreword
This European Standard (EN 12896:2006) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 278 “Road
transport and traffic telematics”, the secretariat of which is held by NEN.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical
text or by endorsement, at the latest by September 2006, and conflicting national standards shall be
withdrawn at the latest by September 2006.
This European Standard supersedes ENV 12896:1997.
According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following
countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland and United Kingdom.
Use of the Transmodel standard
This European Standard presents version 5.1 of the European Standard EN 12986, known as “Transmodel”.
Transmodel 5.1 is a reference standard which provides a conceptual data model for use by organisations with
an interest in information systems for the public transport industry.
As a reference standard, it is not necessary for individual systems or specifications to implement Transmodel.
However, it needs to be possible to describe (for those elements of systems, interfaces and specifications
which fall within the scope of Transmodel):
 the aspects of Transmodel that they have adopted;
 the aspects of Transmodel that they have chosen not to adopt.
For an organisation wishing to specify, acquire and operate information systems, Transmodel may be distilled,
refined, or adapted to form a comprehensive data model for the organisation, or specific data models for
database design or interface specification.
For an organisation wishing to design, develop and supply information systems, Transmodel may be distilled,
refined, or adapted to form a comprehensive data model for the product suite.
Transmodel origins
ENV 12896
The prestandard ENV 12896 was prepared by the work area Transmodel of the EuroBus project (1992-1994)
and by the DRIVE II task force Harpist (1995). The EuroBus/Transmodel and Harpist kernel team was
established as a subgroup of CEN TC278 Working Group 3. The results of these projects were based upon
earlier results reached within the Drive I Cassiope project and the ÖPNV data model for public transport, a
German national standard. The prestandard reflected the contents of deliverable C1 of the Harpist task force,
published in May 1995, with modifications resulting from the discussion process in CEN TC278/WG3 between
May and October 1995.
The different organisations that have technically contributed to the preparation of the prestandard ENV 12896
were the partners of EuroBus/Transmodel and the Harpist task force: Beachcroft Systems (UK), CETE-
méditerranée (F), CTA Systems (NL), Ingénieur Conseil Bruno Bert (F), Koninklijk Nederlands Vervoer (NL),
Leeds University (UK), Régie des Transports de Marseille (F), SNV Studiengesellschaft Verkehr (D),
Stuttgarter Straßenbahnen AG (D), TransExpert (F), TransTeC (D) and VSN Groep (NL).
The sponsors of the project were the European Communities (EC, DG XIII, F/5, Drive Programme, 1992-94),
the French Ministry of Transportation, the Dutch Ministry of Transportation and the German Federal Ministry of
Research and Technology.
Titan
The EC project Titan concerned validation and further development of ENV 12896. The different organisations
that have technically contributed to the Titan project were: CETE-Méditerranée (F), Üstra (D), OASA (GR),
RATP (F), SLTC (F), Salzburger Stadtwerke AG (A), TransExpert (F), TransTeC (D), Synergy (GR), TRUST
EEIG (D).
The sponsoring partner was the French Ministry of Transport (DTT/SAE). The project was co-funded by the
European Communities and some of the partners, in particular the pilot sites – Lyon (F), Hanover (D) and
Salzburg (A).
SITP and SITP2
The French-led project SITP (Système d'Information Transport Public) was sponsored by the French Ministry
of Transport (Direction des Transports Terrestres – DTT), the companies Gemplus (F) and Setec ITS (F), and
the Transmodel Users’ Support Team EEIG (F and D).
SITP built on the prestandard ENV 12896 (issued May 1997) and the results of the EC project Titan
(1996-1998). SITP produced the extensions requested of ENV12896; these were validated during 1999-2000.
A successor project, SITP2, developed the standard further during 2001-2002.
CEN TC 278 WG 3 SG 4
During 2002-2003, CEN convened a new subgroup of TC 278 WG3 to consider how Transmodel should be
taken forward. It considered responses to previous drafts of Transmodel as well as the work of SITP/SITP2,
the German VDV specifications, and a range of UK projects.
SG4 was led by the UK Department for Transport, with participants from VDV (D), RATP (F), HÜR (DK),
Setec (F), TRUST E.E.I.G. (Transmodel Users’ Support Team) (F and D) and Centaur Consulting (UK).
This document, and additional guidance documents (originally produced under SITP) for how it can be used,
may be found at www.transmodel.org. Other sites which make this available include www.sitp.its.setec.fr.
Structure of this European Standard
The present European Standard is composed of two parts:
 the normative part (main document and Annex A);
 the informative part (Annexes B, C and D).
The main document presents:
 the history (Foreword) and the rationale (Introduction) of the proposed standard;
 the executive summary of the reference data model (1. Scope);
 the definitions of the terms as they are used in this document (2. Terms and definitions);
 the technical requirements in form of detailed textual descriptions and diagrams (Clause 3.
Requirements).
A series of Annexes provides:
 the definitions of the concepts (entity definitions), together with the main properties of the concepts (main
attributes, identifiers, super-types) (Annex A, normative);
 modelling convention: consistency and integrity conditions, introduction to data modelling and the
methodology used, and a functional model (Annex B, informative);
 modifications to ENV 12896 (Annex C, informative);
 UML presentation of the reference data model (Annex D, informative).
Conformance
A specification which cites Transmodel needs to include comparisons of the specification against the
Transmodel reference data model in at least two conformance levels:
 level 1 (the global level) identifies which data domains within the specification are drawn from the
Transmodel data domains, and which are not;
 level 2 (the detailed level) compares the data model within the specification against the Transmodel
entities.
The level 1 conformance statement shall be presented as a table based on one of the following:
 the Transmodel data domains as described in the normative part of the document: description of the
network, versions/validity/layers, tactical planning components, vehicle scheduling, driver scheduling,
schedules and versions, rostering, personnel disposition, operations monitoring and control, passenger
information, fare collection, management information, multi-modal operation, multiple operators’
environment;
 alternatively, the corresponding diagrams as presented in this document, either in the forms in the main
text or in the equivalent UML forms in the informative Annex (Annex D).
The level 2 conformance statement shall be presented as a table in which the data concepts used in the
specification are described as:
 “Unmodified”: concepts in the specification which have the same definition, properties and relationships
as in the corresponding Transmodel domain;
 “Modified”: concepts in the specification which are similar to a Transmodel concept but which differ in the
details of certain attributes and/or relationships (e.g. attributes added);
 “Alternative”: concepts or groups of concepts in the specification which model the same concepts as
Transmodel but in a significantly different way;
 “Additional”: concepts in the specification which are not drawn from Transmodel;
 “Omitted”: concepts in Transmodel which are not used in the specification.
Future developments
The developers of this standard recognise that there is continual development in the business practice of the
public transport industry, and that Transmodel needs to continue to evolve to fulfil its needs. In version 5.1, the
particular weaknesses that have been identified during consultation are the following:
 Metadata. Transmodel at present does not provide adequate support for data management and data
protection. Future versions will aim to identify metadata such as currency, accuracy, ownership and
permissions.
 Long distance and multimodal journeys. Transmodel focuses on city-based travel. For longer journeys,
aspects such as check-in time or seat reservation will need to be covered, including travel preferences
such as aisle/window seat, smoking/non-smoking, dietary needs etc.
 Fares and tickets. Transmodel splits passenger information and fare collection into separate areas and
therefore does not deal with the issue of ticketing as a whole. This should be reviewed against the
provisions of other emerging standards, including as the CEN work in EN 1545 and on IOPTA Data
Structures. Further loyalty schemes are not addressed, ie the accumulation of transferable and
redeemable ‘points’.
 Journey add-ons. Transmodel does allow user-definable components to be added to sales products.
However it does not make provision for specific common add-ons to journeys, such as inclusive meals or
newspapers.
These areas form the basis of work items to extend and refine the standard in the next phase of Transmodel
development. Additionally, CEN welcomes input from users of this standard as to where Transmodel needs
extension or refinement.
The presentation of this European Standard has also been reviewed. A UML version has been included in this
version as an informative Annex (Annex D). It is expected that future versions of this standard may be
developed and presented using UML normatively.
Introduction
Rationale for the Transmodel standard
Public transport services rely increasingly
...