Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update TestSpecificationType elements in TestSpecification.xsd (if OperationsTest.xsd is not used) to align with updated 950002 #24

Open
racheliurui opened this issue Aug 23, 2019 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
ERDi Issues that need to be fixed in ERDi version High MESA Issues that need to be fixed in MISA Version

Comments

@racheliurui
Copy link
Collaborator

racheliurui commented Aug 23, 2019

MESAInternational/B2MML-BatchML#47

Background, Related to #101

Under issue #101, the new OperationsTest.xsd schema is added to align with 950002 by including TestSpecificationType and TestResultType together which allows 1st order transactions for both types.

Solution
IF MESA does not except the OperationsTest.xsd change, the following changes are recommended to TestSpecification.xsd.

CHANGE: "TestPropertyMeasurementType" with "PropertyMeasurementType"
Multiple changes to TestSpecificationType to align with updated 950002 Operations Test Model's Test Specification object.

complexType name = "TestSpecificationType" element name = "EvaluatedProperty",
CHANGE: type = "TestSpecificationEvaluatedPropertyType" to "EvaluatedPropertyType"

complexType name = "TestSpecificationType"
CHANGE: element name = "PhysicalSample"
TO: "PhysicalSampleRequired"

complexType name = "TestSpecificationType",
ADD: element name = "OperationsTestRequirementID"

complexType name = "TestSpecificationType",
ADD: element name = "TestableObjectID"

Supporting Document

950002 JWG5 CDV01 version (2019 12)
Clause 5.9.7 Evaluated property
Clause 5.9.4 Test specification, Table 103 – Test specification relationship roles

Impacted Types

B2MML-TestSpecification.xsd

  • TestSpecificationType
@racheliurui
Copy link
Collaborator Author

racheliurui commented Aug 23, 2019

Personal opinion,
The original name "PhysicalSampleRequired" is very natural to think the possible value should be "yes" or "no".
The proposed name "PhysicalSample" although align with standard, but is a little bit confusing, as if I see an element called "PhysicalSample", I would think I need an ID for "PhysicalSample" here.

--- @CharlieG021163 has agreed on this during today's meeting. The change to PhysicalSampleRequired might be reverted back.
Once it's reverted back, we will update the status of this issue.

racheliurui referenced this issue Aug 23, 2019
Updated TestSpecification.xsd with relationships to TestableObject and OperationsTestRequirement.
@racheliurui racheliurui added ERDi Issues that need to be fixed in ERDi version MESA Issues that need to be fixed in MISA Version labels Aug 23, 2019
@racheliurui racheliurui changed the title Change PhysicalSampleRequired Naming to PhysicalSample in TestSpecificationType update TestSpecificationType elements to align with ISA-950002 Aug 26, 2019
racheliurui referenced this issue Aug 26, 2019
ERDI, MESA: complexType name = "TestSpecificationType", CHANGE element name = "testableObjectID" to "TestableObjectID" to correct typeO.
@racheliurui racheliurui added this to the Discussed & Commented milestone Sep 3, 2019
CharlieG021163 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2019
ERDi, MESA: complexType name = "TestSpecificationType" #24
CHANGE BACK To MASTER:  element name = "PhysicalSample" TO element name = "PhysicalSampleRequired".  
Even though Physical Sample aligns with updated Part 2, PhysicalSample Required is more explicit to the boolean defined values of "Yes" or "No".   Charlie Gifford will submit 95 committee comment to align with B2MML.
CharlieG021163 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2019
ERDi, MESA: complexType name = "TestSpecificationType" #24
CHANGE BACK To MASTER:  element name = "PhysicalSample" TO element name = "PhysicalSampleRequired".  
Even though Physical Sample aligns with updated Part 2, PhysicalSample Required is more explicit to the boolean defined values of "Yes" or "No".   Charlie Gifford will submit 95 committee comment to align with B2MML.
@CharlieG021163
Copy link
Collaborator

CharlieG021163 commented Sep 15, 2019

ACTION
DONE. CHANGED BACK To MASTER: element name = "PhysicalSample" TO element name = "PhysicalSampleRequired".
Even though Physical Sample aligns with updated Part 2, PhysicalSample Required is more explicit to the boolean defined values of "Yes" or "No". Charlie Gifford will submit 95 committee comment to align with B2MML.

@CharlieG021163 CharlieG021163 changed the title update TestSpecificationType elements to align with ISA-950002 Update TestSpecificationType elements to align with ISA-950002 Sep 15, 2019
@CharlieG021163 CharlieG021163 changed the title Update TestSpecificationType elements to align with ISA-950002 Update TestSpecificationType elements in TestSpecification.xsd to align with updated 950002 Jan 22, 2020
@gerardmoloneyetpartners
Copy link
Collaborator

Accepted by MESA with modifications.
@CharlieG021163 @terryrankine
Name changed to "PhysicalSample" from "PhysicalSampleRequired".
Did not change "TestSpecificationEvaluatedPropertyType" to "EvaluatedPropertyType". Because all of the B2MML schemas operate in the same namespce, the prefix "TestSpecification" was added to all types that are unique to the test specification schema. Previously this convention was not used, and it came back to bite us when we wanted to make changes and had name overlaps.
OperationsTestRequirementID Added
TestableObjectID Added
This to be added to the January 2020 Sprint.

@CharlieG021163 CharlieG021163 changed the title Update TestSpecificationType elements in TestSpecification.xsd to align with updated 950002 Update TestSpecificationType elements in TestSpecification.xsd (if OperationsTest.xsd is not used) to align with updated 950002 Mar 9, 2020
@Dennis-Brandl
Copy link

I agree with the changes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ERDi Issues that need to be fixed in ERDi version High MESA Issues that need to be fixed in MISA Version
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants