Fahrplandaten unter anerkannten Open Data Lizenzen
SWU
SWU Stadtwerke Ulm/Neu-Ulm GmbH
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?><gpx xmlns="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" creator="Graphhopper version 0.13.0" version="1.1" xmlns:gh="https://graphhopper.com/public/schema/gpx/1.1"> | |
<metadata><copyright author="OpenStreetMap contributors"/><link href="http://graphhopper.com"><text>GraphHopper GPX</text></link><time>2019-04-25T20:00:32Z</time></metadata> | |
<trk><name>GraphHopper Track</name><trkseg> | |
<trkpt lat="52.437361" lon="13.796524"><ele>45.67</ele><time>2019-04-25T20:00:32Z</time></trkpt> | |
<trkpt lat="52.435749" lon="13.795112"><ele>45.4</ele><time>2019-04-25T20:00:42Z</time></trkpt> | |
<trkpt lat="52.435537" lon="13.795084"><ele>45.6</ele><time>2019-04-25T20:00:43Z</time></trkpt> | |
<trkpt lat="52.434839" lon="13.794596"><ele>46.2</ele><time>2019-04-25T20:00:48Z</time></trkpt> | |
<trkpt lat="52.429537" lon="13.789757"><ele>49.4</ele><time>2019-04-25T20:01:22Z</time></trkpt> | |
<trkpt lat="52.428229" lon="13.788665"><ele>45.8</ele><time> |
Date | Number of Trips | |
---|---|---|
2015-12-13 | 539 | |
2015-12-14 | 558 | |
2015-12-15 | 687 | |
2015-12-16 | 720 | |
2015-12-17 | 715 | |
2015-12-18 | 716 | |
2015-12-19 | 595 | |
2015-12-20 | 621 | |
2015-12-21 | 643 |
Train Number | Train Id | |
---|---|---|
EC 6 | 84/209827/18/19/80 | |
EN 490 | 84/209183/18/19/80 | |
EN 477 | 84/209117/18/19/80 | |
EN 463 | 84/209036/18/19/80 | |
ICE 26 | 84/207764/18/19/80 | |
IC 61479 | 84/145953/18/19/80 | |
IC 61470 | 84/145910/18/19/80 | |
IC 61458 | 84/145898/18/19/80 | |
IC 61419 | 84/145855/18/19/80 |
DB OpenData Portal:
DB OpenData on GitHub:
item
array vs. single item
) depending on how many items we get.Can you talk to OGC Web Services in JSON instead of XML? You can - with Jsonix, a powerful JavaScript tool for XML <-> JSON conversion. | |
JSON has probably already replaced XML as a "lingua franca". JSON is much lighter and easier to use than XML, especially in JavaScript-based web apps. In the context of GIS, web mapping is dominated by JavaScript libraries like OpenLayers and Leaflet, which speak JSON natively. | |
But what about standards? Open Geospatial Consortium defines more than 50 specifications with more than 100 individual versions. Technically almost all of them are XML-based and defined by XML schemas. These are de jure and de facto standards, widely used and well supported. So you still need XML processing in JS web mapping apps. | |
Processing XML is no rocket science, but it's seldom a pleasure to implement. The OL3 KML parser is about 2.5KLoc of dense XML parsing. Even a very simple WMS GetCapabilities format is almost 1 KLOC. From this code around 90% is pure XML parsing and only 10% is the process |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><WMS_Capabilities version="1.3.0" updateSequence="163" xmlns="http://www.opengis.net/wms" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.opengis.net/wms http://demo.opengeo.org:80/geoserver/schemas/wms/1.3.0/capabilities_1_3_0.xsd"> | |
<Service> | |
<Name>WMS</Name> | |
<Title>OpenGeo Demo Web Map Service</Title> | |
<Abstract/> | |
<KeywordList> | |
<Keyword>geoserver</Keyword> | |
<Keyword>wms</Keyword> | |
</KeywordList> |
public int hashCode() { | |
int currentHashCode = 1; | |
{ | |
currentHashCode = (currentHashCode* 31); | |
USAddress theShipTo; | |
theShipTo = this.getShipTo(); | |
if (theShipTo!= null) { | |
currentHashCode += theShipTo.hashCode(); | |
} | |
} |
public boolean equals(Object object) { | |
if (!(object instanceof PurchaseOrderType)) { | |
return false; | |
} | |
if (this == object) { | |
return true; | |
} | |
final PurchaseOrderType that = ((PurchaseOrderType) object); | |
{ | |
USAddress leftShipTo; |