Skip to content

FutureWork.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
23 lines (12 loc) · 3.4 KB

FutureWork.md

File metadata and controls

23 lines (12 loc) · 3.4 KB
Raw

Future Work

Content gaps and topics to research and expand as understanding of IFC continues to develop. Unlike IFC_Spec_Issues_Summary.md — which tracks gaps and errors in the IFC specification itself — this list tracks gaps in the guide's own coverage: topics not yet explained, examples not yet built, or areas needing deeper research before they can be written up.

  • Update the discussion of IFC specification gaps in IFC_Spec_Issues_Summary.md as they get resolved by buildingSMART or by further research.

  • Research and add examples covering grade-separated and at-grade intersections. IfcRelInterferesElements appears to be relevant — it carries interference types such as Crosses, PassesThrough, PassesOver, and PassesUnder (exact values to verify during research). This relationship is part of the Alignment-based View (AbV) MVD, so it's worth discussing. (Chapter 9 already covers INTERSECTION referents at §9.5; this would extend that discussion.)

  • Provide a better explanation of the other referent types (MARKER, MILEPOST, etc.) and how they are modeled. (Chapter 9, §9.1.)

  • Provide a better explanation of linear reference systems. One example worth covering: a milepost system where mileage resets to zero when a highway crosses into a new state — e.g., an interstate bridge crossing a river, where the mileage reference changes at the midpoint but stationing is likely continuous through the entire project alignment. (Chapter 8 §8.6 covers ISO 19148 linear referencing generally; Chapter 9 covers stationing.)

  • Continue to improve and clarify string-line-based geometry for sectioned surfaces and solids. Right now there are more open questions than answers. (Chapter 10, §10.5 — see also IFC_Spec_Issues_Summary.md #25–34.)

  • Add a discussion of MVDs and the Alignment-based View (AbV) in particular, including why some entities are included and others excluded.

  • Expand the LandXML appendix (Appendix A).

  • Provide a worked example of the dual-carriageway and 7-line (double-track) alignment problem. (Chapter 7, §7.5 documents this as an unsupported use case; see also IFC_Spec_Issues_Summary.md #17.)

  • Analyze, break down, and provide examples for the §8.9.3.28 IfcCurveSegment statement that when an IfcCurveSegment is placed via IfcAxis2PlacementLinear, the positioning curve (Placement.Location.BasisCurve) does not necessarily correspond with the segment's own ParentCurve. Not currently discussed anywhere in the guide — Chapter 2's only citation of §8.9.3.28 is for an unrelated point (Informal Proposition 1, arc-length parameterization), and ParentCurve does not appear in Chapter 8 at all.

  • Investigate whether it's a genuine discrepancy that IfcSectionedSolidHorizontal.CrossSectionPositions.Location (an IfcPointByDistanceExpression) is governed by the NoLongitudinalOffsets formal proposition (forbidding longitudinal offsets only), while IfcSectionedSurface.CrossSectionPositions.Location — also an IfcPointByDistanceExpression — is governed by NoOffsets (forbidding longitudinal, lateral, and vertical offsets). Why are the two formal propositions different? (Chapter 10 currently only states the solid's restriction, at §10.4, and never mentions the surface's — see also IFC_Spec_Issues_Summary.md.)