1319   AddCause for control value Out-of-range

Created: 15 Oct 2014

Status: In Force (green)

Part: Part 7-2 (2010; Edition 2)


Page: 171


Paragraph: Table 53/54

Category: Issue for edition 2 of this part


When controlling analogue values (e.g. INC, APC) a new control value will usually be rejected by the server if its value exceeds process specific tolerated maximum and minimum thresholds.

The definitions of the CDCs in 7-3 accomodate this usecase by incorporating designated DAs (minVal, maxVal) to specify a setting range.

However, imho there is no appropriate AddCause defined that covers the above mentioned case, apart from the generic and very unspecific "Unknown".


I propose to extend the AddCause enumeration with following definition:

Value: Out-of-range
Explanation: Control action is aborted due to the control value being out of the tolerated setting range.

Discussion Created Status
06 Feb 15 In Force (green)
add cause descriptions will be enhanced in Ed2 2.1, specifying that inconsistent-parameters also covers the use case ctlVal service parameter is out-of-range of the supported range. 15 Dec 14 Ballot Period
As minVal, maxVal are parameters bounding the range of the control value, inconsistent-parameters is a reasonable addCause for this case.

The definition should be extended as described by Thierry.
12 Dec 14 Discussion (red)
I propose instead of extending the addCause with a new one, to enhance the definition of the description we have today. Ed2.1 has already extended the scope of LN and objects , so that addCause can be shared by more application.
Out-of-range could be covered by the addCause inconsistent-parameters, for example with the following extended description:
The parameters between successive control services are not consistent, for example the 'ctlNum' of 'selectWithValue' and 'operate' service are different, or the service parameters uses value out-of-range of the supported range."
08 Dec 14 Discussion (red)


Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer

Tissue DB v.