View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
000444910000-005: Information ModelSpecpublic2020-11-10 07:16
ReporterMatthias Damm Assigned ToJeff Harding  
PriorityhighSeveritymajorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status closedResolutionno change required 
Summary0004449: Are arrays valid in the Value of a KeyValuePair Structure / Handling of arrays in BaseDataType
Description

We allow the use of BaseDataType in Structure fields, Variable Values, Method Arguments and Event fields.

In Variable Values, Method Arguments and Event fields we allow to specify the Value Rank as -2 (any) if we want to allow scalar values and arrays for concrete values.

In fields of Structure DataTypes, we only allow -1 (scalar) or >0 (array or more dimensions). This is necessary for concrete DataTypes since they are directly embedded into the structure.

But fields of Structure DataTypes with BaseDataType are encoded as Variant. But a Variant can contain scalar values or arrays (one or more dimensions). Therefore this limitation is not necessary.

Especially in a structure like KeyValuePair, where the Value field is defined as scalar BaseDataType, I assume we want to allow also that the value contains an array e.g. an array of UInt32.

Is this valid?
If not, how can we allow this?
If yes, we are at least silent about this option.

This question also applies to the Body field of the UABinaryFileDataType

TagsNo tags attached.
Commit Version
Fix Due Date

Relationships

related to 0004534 closedJeff Harding 10000-003: Address Space Are arrays valid in the Value of a KeyValuePair Structure / Handling of arrays in BaseDataType 
related to 0006224 closedJim Luth UA Specification Inconsistency in type definitions regarding BaseDataType 

Activities

Jim Luth

2018-12-04 17:26

administrator   ~0009669

yes, we are at least silent about this option, and we don't think we need clarification.

Jim Luth

2018-12-13 23:53

administrator   ~0009693

Clarify in Part 3 that ValueRank of -2 is allowed for a StructureField of BaseDataType.

Clarify its use in Part 5 Key/Value pair construct.

Clarify UABinaryFileDataType in Part 14.

Notation for ValueRank -2 is ([])

Jeff Harding

2018-12-14 17:31

developer   ~0009706

Part 5 already defines a convention to describe a ValueRank of -2 to be {Any} (see Part 5 section 3.3 table 1.

changed the StructureField value field's dataType to be "BaseDataType{Any}"

Matthias Damm

2019-06-04 13:35

developer   ~0010327

In the Erlangen F2F we agreed that BaseDataType implies the value can contain any DataType with any ValueRank and that we just need a clarification in Part 3 but no change in Part 5.

Please revert the change in Part 5 and change the issue to "Resolved" with "No change required"

Jeff Harding

2019-06-04 14:34

developer   ~0010336

Change to Part 5 reverted in version 1.05.5.

Jeff Harding

2019-06-04 14:35

developer   ~0010338

change has been reverted.

Jim Luth

2020-11-03 17:29

administrator   ~0013114

Agreed to no-change-required.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2018-11-10 13:08 Matthias Damm New Issue
2018-12-04 17:26 Jim Luth Note Added: 0009669
2018-12-04 17:26 Jim Luth Status new => resolved
2018-12-04 17:26 Jim Luth Resolution open => no change required
2018-12-04 17:26 Jim Luth Assigned To => Jim Luth
2018-12-04 17:26 Jim Luth Status resolved => closed
2018-12-13 14:53 Matthias Damm Assigned To Jim Luth => Jeff Harding
2018-12-13 14:53 Matthias Damm Status closed => feedback
2018-12-13 14:53 Matthias Damm Resolution no change required => reopened
2018-12-13 23:53 Jim Luth Note Added: 0009693
2018-12-13 23:54 Jim Luth Status feedback => assigned
2018-12-13 23:54 Jim Luth Issue cloned: 0004534
2018-12-13 23:54 Jim Luth Relationship added related to 0004534
2018-12-14 17:31 Jeff Harding Note Added: 0009706
2018-12-14 17:32 Jeff Harding Status assigned => resolved
2018-12-14 17:32 Jeff Harding Fixed in Version => 1.05
2018-12-14 17:32 Jeff Harding Resolution reopened => fixed
2019-06-04 13:35 Matthias Damm Status resolved => feedback
2019-06-04 13:35 Matthias Damm Resolution fixed => reopened
2019-06-04 13:35 Matthias Damm Note Added: 0010327
2019-06-04 14:34 Jeff Harding Note Added: 0010336
2019-06-04 14:35 Jeff Harding Status feedback => resolved
2019-06-04 14:35 Jeff Harding Resolution reopened => no change required
2019-06-04 14:35 Jeff Harding Note Added: 0010338
2020-11-03 17:29 Jim Luth Status resolved => closed
2020-11-03 17:29 Jim Luth Fixed in Version 1.05 =>
2020-11-03 17:29 Jim Luth Note Added: 0013114
2020-11-10 07:16 Matthias Damm Relationship added related to 0006224