1. Table 97 requires server to respond both with Data != NULL and with Data = [CO_ CtrlObjectRef].
2. Table 97 footnote specifies client shall accept 2 alternate server responses but does not specify if client shall accept ANY non-NULL response. This lack of specification can lead to interoperability problems because it allows a client to interpret some responses as neither Response+ nor Response-
3. 20.5.4 contradicts Table 97 and allows server to respond with any non-NULL
Proposal
1. Change row 2 of table parameter column from "Data != NULL" to Data = <CO_ CtrlObjectRef> with reference to footnote a and also remove text from contraint column.
Alternatively, row 2 text "Data != NULL" can be deleted then row 3 text "Data = NULL moved to contraint column
2. Change footnote to "Client implementation conformant to this standard shall accept for backward compatibility reason any value of Data"
3. Append to the sentence in clause 20.5.4 the test "; servers shall respond as specified in Table 97."
Discussion
Created
Status
Ballot expired
21 Nov 23
Solution Accepted
Test procedures are valid to verify that the tissue has been implemented
17 Oct 23
Ballot Period
https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6471
05 Sep 23
Conformance Test Verification
No comment since 1 month. Move to Conformance Test Preparation:
The note in Table 97 will be changed to:
Client implementation conformant to this standard shall accept for backward compatibility reason ANY non-null value in particular
[CO_ CtrlObjectRef]$Oper
[CO_ CtrlObjectRef]$SBO
02 May 23
Conformance Test Preparation
No comment since 1 month. Move to Analysis of compatibility:
The note in Table 97 will be changed to:
Client implementation conformant to this standard shall accept for backward compatibility reason ANY non-null value in particular
[CO_ CtrlObjectRef]$Oper
[CO_ CtrlObjectRef]$SBO
The tissue is solving the compatibility issues requesting that any non null value shall be accepted by the client as a valid Select response +.
No incompatibility issue found.