452   Mandatory DOI elements

Created: 11 Dec 2006

Status: Not Applicable

Part: Part 6 (2004)

Links:

Page:

Clause: 9.3.5.

Paragraph:

Category: No impact on this part

Issue

The use of DOI elements is optional. However, in order to simplify IED configuration, it would be very useful to make it mandatory in certain cases. Particularly, the attriubte instances which belong to the functional constraints CF and SG provide crucial information about system operation. If the value of these instances is not declared in SCL files complete off-line system configuration is not possibe.

Proposal

The use of DOI elements to define special instance related value is mandatory if the attribute belongs to one of the following Functional Constraints: CF and SG.

Discussion Created Status
Although parameter values of attributes with fc=SG, SP and CF are crucial for system operation, they are not for communication interoperability. Further on, within an ICD file project specific aprameter values are not known at all. Further there might be cases where having parameter values within types is more efficient at least from file size point of view. Therefore the proposal is not accepted. 23 Jan 07 Not Applicable
Wolfgang, thanks for the good description!

Here are two issues I have at the moment:

1. You wrote "... This can be done in the DataTemplate section as well as in DOI elements, and especially for CF and SG values, which are often typical in the system, this might even be a better alternative."

I guess you mean the better alternative is to use the DataTemplate ... not to do it in both.

2. The discussion shows that there may be a need to define a PICS-like table for part 6; PICS = protocol implementation conformance statement.

SICS = SCL implementation conformance statement

The SICS could then be used to show the implemented (or required) options of SCL. Entries of that list could be

"Tool supports writing of values for CF and SG in DataTemplate of the SCL file" yes/no

"Tool supports writing of values for CF and SG in DOI of the SCL file" yes/no

I guess there are many other issues ... 		11 Dec 06 Discussion (red)
The isue relates to two problems:
1. defining values in SCL files. This can be done in the DataTemplate section as well as in DOI elements, and especially for CF and SG values, which are often typical in the system, this might even be a better alternative.
2. making CF / SP value definition mandatory within SCL files. This again has two sides: mandatory understanding of the values in the file by the IED tool; this is assumed for all IED tools which read SCD files. Mandatory writing of values into the file: this is not explicitely demanded by a (system or IED) tool, and also not deemed necessary for interoperability. If customers want this, they can demand it.
Conclusion: understanding of values in the SCD file by IED tools or the IED itself is already now demanded. More is not needed for interoperability. 		11 Dec 06 Discussion (red)

 

Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer

Tissue DB v. 23.12.13.1