Changes between Version 9 and Version 10 of SigICMom171115
- Timestamp:
- 11/17/15 16:25:52 (8 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
SigICMom171115
v9 v10 23 23 '''2. Approval of MoM.''' Approved. [[br]] 24 24 25 '''3. DEXPI model for instrumentation.''' Model is not complicated, but problems with terminology. DEXPI worked for a couple of years and have several RDLs. Functional approach to instrumentation. At the same time the RDL2 group was working on tp structure. As a result no effect on structure, but only on labels. New classes added to the DEXPI sandbox (SPARQL endpoint). Later the content will be moved to the PCA RDL. IEC is compatible With DEXPI RDL. DEXPI is not considering process control function and process control systems. Current focus is on P&ID transfer. Control might be added (each year scope is revised).[[br]] 25 '''3. DEXPI model for instrumentation.''' Model is not complicated, but there were problems with terminology. DEXPI have worked for a couple of years and have produced several RDLs. The Project has taken a functional approach to instrumentation, rather than physical. At the same time the RDL2 group was working on top structure. As the result, there is no effect on structure, but only on labels. [[br]] 26 New classes are added to the DEXPI sandbox (SPARQL endpoint). Later the content will be moved to the PCA RDL. IEC is compatible with DEXPI RDL. DEXPI is not considering process control function and process control systems. Current focus is on P&ID transfer. Though control might be added (each year scope is revised).[[br]] 26 27 27 28 '''4. Status of DEXPI.''' see above.[[br]] … … 29 30 '''5. Status of STI.''' Reference group meeting has been held. Working on establishing method and process for discipline groups to work. First working group is planned to start right after Christmas. [[br]] 30 31 31 '''6. Proposal for top classes of instruments.''' PCA RDL entries are reused. PCA RDL had no transmitters. There is a spreadsheet covering instruments (supplemental to top hierarchy). [[br]]32 '''6. Proposal for top classes of instruments.''' PCA RDL entries are reused. PCA RDL had no transmitters. There is a spreadsheet covering instruments (supplemental to top hierarchy). It is agreed that changes need to be marked clearly (see MoM: https://www.posccaesar.org/wiki/SigICMom111115)[[br]] 32 33 33 '''7. Coordination of Reference Data development, maintenance and enhancement. ''' RDL2 spreadsheets are to organize taxonomies. Process control spreadsheets might be overlapping.[[br]] PCA is working on clarifying a procedure for RDL maintenance. It is important to have rules to describe names and definitions.34 '''7. Coordination of Reference Data development, maintenance and enhancement. ''' RDL2 spreadsheets are made to organize taxonomies. No overlap With instrument work, though process control spreadsheets might be overlapping.[[br]] PCA is working on clarifying a procedure for RDL maintenance. It is important to have rules to describe names and definitions. [[br]] 34 35 35 36 '''8. Agenda for the next Meeting.''' [[br]] 36 37 '''9. A.O.B. ''' [[br]]38 37 1. Approval of agenda. [[br]] 39 38 2. Approval of MoM. [[br]] … … 47 46 10. Review of Actions [[br]] 48 47 48 '''9. A.O.B. ''' None[[br]] 49 49 50 50 '''10. Review of Action Items.''' [[br]] 51 Actions could be dealt w th in between meetings. Sending to Darijus.[[br]]51 Actions could be dealt with in between meetings. Sending to Darijus.[[br]] 52 52 53 53 === Action items === 54 '''15.03.''' PCA makes a draft for the next discussion and distributes few days before the next Meeting. (pending from meeting on 3rd of Nov.) [[br]]54 '''15.03.''' PCA makes a draft for the next discussion and distributes few days before the next Meeting. (pending from the meeting on 3rd of Nov.) [[br]] 55 55 '''15.04.''' Hindrik to distribute sections 4.1 and 5.1 from "Functional safety" document.[[br]] 56 56 '''15.05.''' Hindrik to discuss with Hans edm namespace used in instrumentation top hierarchy. How differet is it from Part 2 and Part 12? edm:FunctionalObject might be miscommunication as Keith was using FunctionalPhysicalObject.[[br]]
