Issues raised against the DEXlib infrastructure.

Issue file: dexlib/docs/issues/issues.xml

GENERAL issues

Open issue Issue: RBN-1 by Rob Bodington (05-09-02) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

/IGNORE is used inconsistently throughout the capabilities.

According to AP239 annex and dexlib/help/dex/implementor_trans.xml, the following should be used.

In particular optional values should default to '$' and only be set to '/IGNORE' if there is a value assigned.

Value

Description
'' indicates user data managed by the sending system but not provided for data exchange.
'/NULL' indicates user data in a mandatory attribute that is not managed by the sending system or currently not known.
'$' $ is used in the physical file, if an optional attribute is not instantiated.
'/IGNORE' Attribute values are set to '/IGNORE' when the information that could be held by the attribute is instead assigned to the instance of the entity.

Table 1 — Attribute values

Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-09-21)
The proposal is that wherever an attribute should not be used, i.e. it should have been removed from the model as assignment is used instead, it should be populated with /IGNORE, regardless of whether the attribute is used or not. This means that any translator does not have to parse the attributes to determine whether there is an assignment holding the value or not. This should be consistent through out.
Comment: (Sean Barker 06-01-16)
Table revised, but question of whether this is purely for instance diagrams or whether the transferred data could contain $ raised.

Open issue Issue: RBN-3 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

We need to agree what URL / URN we are supposed to be using for identification of the external_class_library and use it consistently. Propose that we use urn:plcs:rdl:std as the id of external_class_library for all standard classes. We then add an attribute to the figure XML which will cause the XSL to output the footnote: "The URN urn:plcs:rdl used in the figure is provided for example only. The correct urn is in the process of being registered." For non standard extensions of the PLCS RDL, e.g. the UK MOD reference data that extends the PLCS RDL would have a urn of: urn:plcs:rdl:ukmod

Open issue Issue: RBN-4 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

There are situations where the identification of something is not known or not required. e.g. a failure mode, or the serial number or part number or state is not known, The proposal is use the entity, e.g. state, but not provide any identification_assignment.

Open issue Issue: RBN-5 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

The VISIO and other source files should be uploaded to the relevant dvlp folder once the capability is complete.

Open issue Issue: RBN-8 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

Should we include example data (e.g. Part 21 or Part28)?
Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-09-21)
The P28 examples will be very large. We should provide a set of test examples outside of the capabilities. Each DEX should have a full example.

Open issue Issue: RBN-9 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

Documentation should be provided as to how to extend the PLCS reference data. I.e. how to identify which PLCS classes need to be extended.

Open issue Issue: RBN-10 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

We need a capability assigning_person_in_organization with a template: assigning_person_in_organization

Open issue Issue: RBN-11 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

We need a capability to assign_organization_type

Open issue Issue: RBN-12 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

We need a capability assigning_contract with a template assigning_contract

Open issue Issue: GYL-1 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-10-04) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

Raise a SEDS against AP239 regarding the requirement for a new module that deals with the assignment of descriptions to any entity type.

Open issue Issue: GYL-2 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-11-07) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

Rename existing capability representing_condition with assigning_condition in order to follow the convention taken by the other assigning capabilities.. Add template assigning_condition to the capability

Open issue Issue: GYL-3 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-12-09) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

Replace the existing capability representing_justification with assigning_justification in order to follow the convention taken by the other assigning capabilities. Add template assigning_justification to the capability

GENERAL issues

Closed issue Issue: RBN-2 by Rob Bodington (05-09-05) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

We should be consistent in our use of PLCS, AP239, ISO 10303-239.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-09-21)
We should use ISO 10303-239 PLCS.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-6 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

There is a requirement to add a template "assigning_reference_data_with_plcs_superclass" which shows that when a classification is an extension of PLCS reference data, the class + the PLCS super class should included. This should be added to the capability assigning_reference_data.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-04)
Added. However, the name of the Template has been changed to assigning_business_specific_reference_data.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-7 by Rob Bodington (05-09-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

We should use Bike related data in all examples.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-09-21)
Agreed.