Interpretation of over-writing substitution values:
After subEna is set to True it seems to be possible to set new values for subVal, subMag, subCMag, and subQ.
This is not expressivly state in 7-2.
See also Tissue 373.
Proposal
Add text, e.g.:
After subEna is set to True it shall be possible to set new values (over-write the current values) for subVal, subMag, subCMag, subQ, and subID. The updated values shall be used to update the corresponding process values (stVal, ...).
The over-write of the values subVal, subMag, subCMag, and subQ shall be accompanied by a new value for subID.
Discussion
Created
Status
Final proposal accepted.
Changed status to green.
13 Apr 07
In Force (green)
Text as shown in the first part of the proposal has been added to clause 12 after Note 2 under Figure 16:
After subEna is set to True it shall be possible to set new values (over-write the current values) for subVal, subMag, subCMag, subQ, and subID. The updated values shall be used to update the corresponding process values (stVal, ...).
Please check also Tissue 373.
The fifth bullet under clause 12 defines:
– subID (value to indicate the initiator of the substitution).
If it is true that the value to indicate the initiator of the substitution shall be provided for each value set, then it needs to be provided with each set service.
What is "the initiator of the substitution"? CC1 sets all values ... that means CC1 is the initiator! Later CC2 sets the value of subVal to a new value. Which client is now initiator of the substitution? CC1 or CC2.
My interpretation is: In the first case it is CC1 and in the second it is CC2. CC2 should write the value CC2 to subID.
No change on that issue unless we discuss Tissue #373 again.
18 Mar 07
Ballot Period
I agree with Herb, but can also understand a requirement that the subID should always show the substituting source. Might be it can be formulated that way, without having to refer to the 'writing'.
02 Nov 06
Discussion (red)
I agree with the first paragraph, disagree with the second. If the same entity is performing the substitution, then why should a new value for subID be required?