DDS12 — Small naming inconsistentcies between PIM and PSM

Summary:
In section 2.1.2.4.1.17, the explanation for the "copy_from _topic_qos" operation mentions two parameters called "topic_qos" and "datawriter_qos_list". Both parameter names do not exist.

In the PSM (section 2.2.3) the first two parameters for all "read()" and "take()" methods (and their variants) are consistently called "received_data" and "sample_infos". In the DataReader PIM in section 2.1.2.5.3, these same names are only used for the "read()" and "take()" methods. All their variants and all have a first parameter called "data_values". The FooDataReader PIM has the same issue, but even uses the name "data_values" for the read() and take() methods themselves.

Proposed Resolution::
Replace "topic_qos" with "a_topic_qos" and "datawriter_qos_list" with "a_datawriter_qos".

Consistently use the parameter name "received_data" in bot the PIM and the PSM.

We propose we either ignore the second change regarding 'data_values' or change it the other way around (from received_data to data_values). This impacts the specification less. There are a lot of places that would be affected by the change to "received_data" from "data_values"

Proposed Revised Text::

Section 2.1.2.4.1.17 copy_from_topic_qos:
1st paragraph, replace: "topic_qos" with "a_topic_qos"
1st, 2nd, and 3rd paragraph, replace: "datawriter_qos_list" with "a_datawriter_qos"

Section 2.2.3
replace formal paramater name "received_data" with "data_value" or "data_values" depending on whether the typeis a sequence or not This affects DataReader::take* DataReader::read*, FooDataReader::take* and FooDataReader::read*

Section 2.1.2.5.3 DataReader Class table replace "received_data" with "data_values". This affects the operations:
return_loan
take
read

Section 2.2.3 DCPS PSM : IDL
Change formal parameter of read/take operations from "received_data" with "data_values". This affects the operations:

see above