During review of Part 5 1.05.04 RC we concluded that this review comment required a further discussion which this mantis issue addresses.

Unified Automation - Frank Fischer
There are multiple issues with this change:

• It does not solve the issue of persisting NodeIds as ExpandedNodeIds usually are not sent with a NamespaceUri either, only when the Node is from a different server.
• This would need to be changed for all AuditEvents with NodeIds, which would not be possible
  when using Structures with NodeIds like ModelChangeStructureDataType.
• This is a potential breaking change for clients already evaluating these Events.
  The solution would be for the client to persist the NodeIds together with a namespace table.

Matthias:
I think Frank did not get the difference between what a client need to persist if it persists AuditEvents from a server (need to persist the used namespace array at this point in time) and audit events that report client actions of the server on another server.
I am not sure if we need to explain the difference better.

But he is right that we sa nothing about the exact handling of the ExpandedNodeId.

The ExpandedNodeId can have the URI or the index for the namespace and it has also a server index.

The ServerUri is in the AuditClientEventType – what should be set in the ServerIndex?

We must require that the ExpandedNodeId contains always the NamespaceUr if it is another server and the eixes if it is the same server.