View Issue Details
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0005788 | 10000-005: Information Model | Spec | public | 2020-07-09 10:13 | 2021-10-26 17:02 |
Reporter | SendMatt | Assigned To | Jeff Harding | ||
Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | have not tried |
Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
Fixed in Version | 1.04 | ||||
Summary | 0005788: Description of property 'Deprecated' [BOOLEAN] at 'DataTypeDictionaryType' is not clear | ||||
Description | D.5.2 DataTypeDictionaryType ( https://reference.opcfoundation.org/v104/Core/docs/Part5/D.5.2/ ): Assumption1: The value (TRUE/FALSE) of Boolean property 'Deprecated' is NOT relevant, only the presence of the property itself, or? (Further assuming that only the presence of property 'Deprecated' is relevant but not the value) Assumption2: If one (custom) DataType does not provide data type information by 'DataTypeDefinition' property --> 'Deprecated' property is NOT present at corresponding 'DataTypeDictionaryType'; therefore e.g. Clients require data type information from corresponding DataTypeDictionary; Assumption3: If !!ALL!! (custom) DataTypes do provide data type information by 'DataTypeDefinition' property --> 'Deprecated' property shall be present at corresponding 'DataTypeDictionaryType'; therefore e.g. Clients (supporting 'DataTypeDefinition' property) can "skip" data type information from corresponding DataTypeDictionary and expect that data type information about (all custom) DataTypes are provided via 'DataTypeDefinition' property by server; --> Are those three "interpretations"/assumptions correct? If so, the second sentence in description "Servers that provide DataType definitions as a DataTypeDefinition Attribute and through a DataTypeDictionaryType shall expose this Property." should be ommitted as it could be misinterpreted as 'If server provides both (new simplified approach with 'DataTypeDefinition' AND old-style "DataTypeDictionaryType" ) ways the 'Deprecated' property needs to exist (even if at least one custom DataType definitions is not provided via DataTypeDefinition attribute). https://reference.opcfoundation.org/v104/Core/docs/Part5/D.1/ | ||||
Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
Commit Version | |||||
Fix Due Date | |||||
|
The DataTypeDictionary approach for DataTypes will be deprecated with the release of Version 1.05 and the Annex will be removed from the spec. |
|
OK, so there is no more "DataTypeDictionary approach for DataTypes " in future 1.05. Nevertheless clarification for current 1.04 still missing (errata required?) as currently both approaches are "alive" and you might miss the "DataTypeDefinition Attribute" as is designated as (O)ptional at table "Table 17 – Overview of Attributes" ( https://reference.opcfoundation.org/v104/Core/docs/Part3/5.9/ ) but in fact is already (M)andatory in V1.04 for some cases, which is only mentioned in description at "5.8.3 DataType NodeClass" ( https://reference.opcfoundation.org/v104/Core/docs/Part3/5.8.3/ ). [Additional note: beside (O)ptional and (M)andatory there should something like (C)onditional be defined/used with UA specs] |
|
Added the statement "The value of this property should be set to 1 however it is only the presence of this optional Property which indicates the Server provides DataTypes through DataTypeDefinition Attributes." to the definition of the Deprecated Property. |
|
Added Clarification the the value of the Deprecated Property can be ignored but should be set to 1. |
|
Agree to changes in telecon. |
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
---|---|---|---|
2020-07-09 10:13 | SendMatt | New Issue | |
2020-07-20 15:51 | Jim Luth | Target Version | => 1.05 |
2020-07-20 15:51 | Jim Luth | Assigned To | => Jeff Harding |
2020-07-20 15:51 | Jim Luth | Status | new => assigned |
2020-07-29 13:42 | Jeff Harding | Status | assigned => resolved |
2020-07-29 13:42 | Jeff Harding | Resolution | open => no change required |
2020-07-29 13:42 | Jeff Harding | Fixed in Version | => 1.05 |
2020-07-29 13:42 | Jeff Harding | Note Added: 0012635 | |
2020-07-30 07:54 | SendMatt | Status | resolved => feedback |
2020-07-30 07:54 | SendMatt | Resolution | no change required => reopened |
2020-07-30 07:54 | SendMatt | Note Added: 0012639 | |
2021-06-03 19:03 | Jim Luth | Status | feedback => assigned |
2021-10-25 19:22 | Jeff Harding | Note Added: 0015212 | |
2021-10-25 19:24 | Jeff Harding | Status | assigned => resolved |
2021-10-25 19:24 | Jeff Harding | Resolution | reopened => fixed |
2021-10-25 19:24 | Jeff Harding | Fixed in Version | => 1.04 |
2021-10-25 19:24 | Jeff Harding | Note Added: 0015213 | |
2021-10-26 16:46 | Jim Luth | Status | resolved => closed |
2021-10-26 16:46 | Jim Luth | Note Added: 0015223 |