The signature of the EstablishConnections contains AssetVerifications, which is processed by the AssetVerificationCmd. AssetVerifications is an array of AssetVerificationDataType. The number of elements in the array specifies how many times to calls VerifyAsset(). Each array element contains the information which Asset to verify (AssetToVerify), i.e. where to call the Method plus the [in] arguments for the Method (VerificationMode, ExpectedVerificationVariables, ExpectedAdditionalVerificationVariables) plus the ExpectedVerificationResult to be compared with the VerficationResult ([out] argument of the VerifyAsset Method).

The passed stated above wants to tell (and maybe I didn't succeed), that the EstablishConnections Method shall call the VerifyAsset Method for each element in the array (even if one of the Verifies fails). Meaning, if I have five elements in the array, and the third call fails, still call the VerifyAsset for the forth and fifth element.

I propose to remove this sentence completely, since the preceeding two paragraphs are already sufficient ("shall execute for each element")

If CommandMask VerifyAssetCmd is set, the EstablishConnections implementation shall execute the IAssetRevisionType VerifyAsset Method for each element in the AssetVerifications array. The VerifyAsset Method shall be called on each AssetToVerify, supplying the VerificationMode, ExpectedVerificationVariables and ExpectedAdditionalVerificationVariables as Method Arguments.
The StatusCode returned by the VerifyAsset Method, and the values of its output Arguments VerificationResult, VerificationVariablesErrors, and VerificationAdditionalVariablesErrors shall be stored in the appropriate elements in AssetVerificationResults (see 10.4).

BTW: We should also remove the paragraph "The EstablishConnections implementation shall process all elements in the ConnectionEndpointConfigurations that contain non-empty ExpectedVerificationVariables, even if an error is encountered on an element in the array." from the section below; again this is stated already in the first paragraph.

Updated section 6.2.4.3.2 Command VerifyAssetCmd and 6.2.4.3.3 Command VerifyFunctionalEntityCmd

Thomas accepted the changes above, however, for VerifyAsset one open issue remains:

It is unclear, whether VerifyAsset should continue with the verification if the first error appears, or stop verification and use Bad_NothingToDo for the rest? In our discussion we left it open for the implementation to choose what to do, do we need more clarification in the spec about it?

Continued in the related issue

See previous notes

review in info model call, agreed to close