(originally reported by Richard Smith - BAE Systems)

(Proivde_Health_State, page 194, para above table 7.185) contains the following description:

“Reason for health state
Each reported health state other than AVAILABLE is accompanied by the reason(s) for that health. In this way the CMS may for instance derive that although the technical state of the subsystem is STANDBY (and NOT AVAILABLE for that reason), there are also faults that would prevent the service to become AVAILABLE when the technical state would be switched to ONLINE.”

This appears perfectly reasonable to me, although it is then followed immediately by:
“Pre-condition: Subsystem technical state The subsystem is in technical state ONLINE or READY.”

This appears to imply, to me, that the report service health is only applicable to the ONLINE or READY technical state, even though the para above suggests it would be of use in the STANDBY state!

Include STANDBY as precondition to Provide_Health_State_CMS

Include STANDBY as precondition to Provide_Health_State_CMS

Within Subsystem_Control.idl the struct service_health_type (line 327) has the member health_state (line 330) declared with type health_state_reason_type. The specification states it should be health_state_type. Believe this is an error?

service_health_type struct is correct in 3.0 beta

service_health_type struct is correct in 3.0 beta and the health_state attribute has been changed to type health_state_type already.

The copyright holders shown at the beginning of the document should include not only the original submitters but also the members of all the subsequent FTFs/RTFs. It seems this list has not been maintained as the following companies are missing:

General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, SimVentions, Microfocus, Real-Time Innovations,

Copyright holders already updated for 3.0 beta

Copyright holders already updated for 3.0 beta

The IDL files have the wrong interface version in them at the top of the file.

Version has been removed from IDL files in later submissions

Version has been removed from IDL files in later submissions

The description of the interface states that
"It is the CMS's responsibility to initiate the determination of initial state by making a request for information to the subsystem."
However, there is no operation defined to request information from the subsystem.
(Note: the protocol was probably simplified in working towards the v1.0 submission without revising the overall description of this particular interface).

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

there are several instances where the IDL generated from the XMI has String (capitalised) rather than in lower case which causes an error in some DDS IDL compilers. These should be generated as lower case in the following files:
Manage_Network_Participation.idl
Plot_Reporting.idl
Track_Reporting.idl
Label_Tracks.idl

In affected IDL files replace String with string

In the 4 affected IDL files replace the capitalised String with all lower case string and resubmit the zipped IDL files

There are track_priority_type typedefs defined in both the Track_Reporting and Tracking_Control Domain Model packages.

OARIS 3.0 beta has already addressed this

OARIS 3.0 beta has already addressed this by creating a common definition which is then used in specific unions elsewhere

Interface Manage_Physical_Configuration_CMS contains method receive_physical_configuration_success, which is used where receive_acknowledgement from common_use_case_interface would be expected

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

Method report_sim_mode_status does not contain the status of the session e.g. whether it is running, not started, frozen etc. The specification should also describe the overall state machine described by the interface.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

Some passive sensors are unable to resolve a bearing around the line of symmetry through the sensor. The polar model for positions in the specifications does not allow this ambiguity to be clearly represented.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

typedef sequence<org::omg::c4i::Domain_Model::Common_Types::subsystem_id_type, 256> sensor_track_based_on_id_type;

Has subsystem_id_type rather than plot_id_type as its value type.

Fixed in OARIS 3.0

Relationship has been changed through a plot association type and so this issue is no longer valid.

METOC RFP (c4i/08-12-02) is referenced in dtc/22-06-03 but does not yet exist on the OMG site in any form.

Reference was removed from 3.0 beta

The missing reference was already removed from 3.0 beta submission

For Service Health Reporting and Subsystem Health Reporting the specification describes two scenarios one on subsystem initiative and another on request.
In both cases the subsystem calls a method on the CMS interface with a request_id. In the 'on subsystem initiative' case it is unclear what value the subsystem should use for the request_id. Any value chosen could potentially be misinterpreted as a value for an actual CMS request.

Add functions to provide health reporting on subsystem initiative

Add functions to provide health reporting on subsystem initiative - i.e. the same as those requested by the CMS but without the request ID.

The Exchange Heartbeat use case supports assurance cases relating to runtime software integrity, in particular that critical functionality continues to be available and has not failed silently.
For the DDS PSM this is currently mapped to the built-in DDS API, but the on_requested_deadline_missed requires a suitable topic definition (which could/should be provided by the Exchange Heartbeat use case).

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

Attribute velocity in class sensor_track_type is mandatory but will not be defined / known for bearings tracks

Make azimuth optional on the polar velocity type

Make azimuth_rate optional on the polar velocity type to allow for sensor which report bearing only tracks

The description of the interface states that
"It is the CMS's responsibility to initiate the determination of initial state by making a request for information to the subsystem."
However, there is no operation defined to request information from the subsystem.
(Note: the protocol was probably simplified in working towards the v1.0 submission without revising the overall description of this particular interface).

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

The description of the interface states that
"It is the CMS's responsibility to initiate the determination of initial state by making a request for information to the subsystem."
However, there is no operation defined to request information from the subsystem.
(Note: the protocol was probably simplified in working towards the v1.0 submission without revising the overall description of this particular interface).

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

...

Issue not present in 3.0 beta

The issue reported in 2.0 does not appear to be present in 3.0 beta

delete_sensor_track is used as an interface in the Tracking_Control service and as a method on the Provide_Sensor_Tracks interface. This is potentially confusing and in principle could cause name clashes.

Rename delete_sensor_track method to end_sensor_track

Rename the delete_sensor_track method in the Provide_Sensor_Tracks_CMS interface to end_sensor_track

Perform Offline test should be compliance level 3A not 3B

Move Perform Offline Test to compliance level 3A

Move Perform Offline Test to compliance level 3A. Text and associated diagrams

The DDS topic types for PIM operations acquire_mastership and release_mastership are both missing from the IDL. Additionally request_id is a missing parameter from these operations, as otherwise the receive_acknowledgement operations in the sequence diagrams have an undefined source of request_id.

Acquire mastership already present in 3.0 IDL

This problem was already fixed in 3.0 beta

An important aspect of sensor performance estimation is to understand bias particularly for atmospheric effects.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

There are two activities "Define Test Target Scenario" & "Control Test Target Facility" for one interface

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

.

Remove suggested items from additional_information description

Remove suggested items from additional_information description that are already present as attributes on the type:
priority
identification

On page 95 the description of technical_state_type calls it a class while the diagrams stereotype it as an IDLEnum.

Change description of technical_state_type

Change description of technical_state_type to IDLEnum

This is a useful mode of operation ...

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

to be elaborated ...

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

...

Change types from activity to action

types used in the activity diagrams are all activity rather than action which would be preferred in current UML.

For example CORBA, ALMAS & AMSM

Normative References were already updated at 3.0 beta

Normative References were already updated at 3.0 beta with CORBA, ALMAS and AMSM not present

The interaction diagrams for the Control_Emissions service do not provide a mechanism for determining the initial state of the emission control setting.
Possibilities are that the CMS is expected to explicitly set this for all sensors as part of startup of each sensor (e.g. whilst they are in the READY state) or that each sensor has its own default (or persistent) state that it assumes on each startup.
Further information: The description of the ONLINE technical state, requires Control Emissions to occur once the subsystem is in this state and implies that the emission control setting is off when the subsystem enters the ONLINE state.
More information: The description of the Control_Emissions_CMS interface states: "It is the CMS's responsibility to initiate the determination of initial state by making a request for information to the subsystem." However there is no method on the subsystem interface to provide this information.
The description of Control_Emissions_CMS interface should be updated accordingly.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

The sensor orientation message reports the orientation of the sensor with two angles: azimuth and elevation. But to completely describe orientation, three angles are required. The missing angle is a rotation about the normal from the array. It can becalled a clocking angle. Using azimuth and elevation correspond to Cardan angles, which describe orientation as heading, elevation, and bank. The missing angle in this system is the bank angle. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler_angles

Add bank angle to sensor_orientation_type

Create a new type for bank angle and add to the sensor_orientation_type class.

Searches can potentially take a long time, there is no message/interaction to stop one once its in progress. Suggest adding a stop_cued_search as with stop_surveillance.

Add stop_cued_search operation to Perform_Cued_Search_Sub interface

Add stop_cued_search operation to Perform_Cued_Search_Sub interface. Update the table describing the operation and the sequence diagram to show usage.

The sensor orientation message reports the orientation of the sensor relative to a specified coordinate system. However, if a radar has multiple sensors there is no way to distinguish between them. I suggest adding an optional sensor_id field (type short) to distinguish between multiple sensors.

Add optional sensor_id to sensor_orientation_type

Add optional sensor_id to sensor_orientation_type of type short

Range rate type limited to 0-1e5, this should also accept negative values for closing rates. Also an issue in version 3 beta.

Modify range to allow negative

Change the range on range_rate_type to be -1 e5 .. 1 e5

I am trying to download the OARIS v1.1 XMI file but I am getting a http error 404 - Page not found message when clicking on the link provided (https://www.omg.org/spec/OARIS/20190301/OARIS%20PSM%20XMI.xml) under the OARIS v1.1 page (https://www.omg.org/spec/OARIS/1.1)

Not an OARIS 3.0 FTF Issue

Not an OARIS 3.0 FTF Issue and has been resolved by OMG staff

range_rate_type is used to quantify the rate of change of the range. The range of allowed values is 0.0 to 1e5, but this is too restrictive. Range rate is negative when an object is getting closer to the origin, i.e. the range is decreasing so range rate is negative. The lower bound of range rate should be -1e5, the negative of the maximum value.

Fixed by duplicate issue OARIS3-23

Fixed by duplicate issue OARIS3-23

The specification and Sensor_Assessment.idl have multiple misspellings of "equipment" as "equipement". All of the misspellings are in types and structs related to sensor_plot_equipement_assessment.

Update diagram 7.158 to correct spelling

Update diagram 7.158 to correct spelling

system_track_type does not contain identity or classification

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

These tags are meaningless in the specification.

Remove ea_guid tags from the model

Remove ea_guid tags from methods in the model

The description of the NORTH_DOWN in coordinate_orientation_type says:

Valid for Polar Coordinate Kind
Azimuth has origin (0.0) at North, clockwise positive, measured in the horizontal plane
Elevation has origin (0.0) when pointing directly down, and 180.0 degrees when pointing directly up, measured in the vertical plane.

This would be fine except the elevation_coordinate_type specifically says units are radians with values from -PI/2 to +PI/2.

I suggest changing the maximum value of elevation in the description of NORTH_DOWN from 180.0 degrees to PI radians and change the maximum value of elevation_coordinate_type from +PI/2 to +PI.

Change NORTH_DOWN descriptive text and elevation_coordinate_type max limit

Change the maximum value of elevation in the description of NORTH_DOWN from 180.0 degrees to PI radians and change the maximum value of elevation_coordinate_type from +PI/2 to +PI.

The following is the description of request_id in oaris 2.0 spec:

7.3.12.6 request_id_type
Type: IDLTypeDef unsigned long long
Package: Requests
The purpose of the request_id is to uniquely relate responses of the subsystem (server) to requests of the CMS (client). The request_id is set by the client. It is the responsibility of the client to specify a system-wide unique request_id (e.g. based on a combination of client id and a sequence number / time of request). Here it indicates that CMS as client should specify request_id. But in section 7.7.5.3 Provide_Subsystem_Identification, it documents that it should be the subsystem to initiate the communication to CMS, which implies subsystem will need to specify request_id required in receive_sub_identification_data_type before sending it to CMS.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

The OARIS 2.0 specification says registration includes information on:

• The service for which the actor wants to register / deregister his interest
• The information within the service for which the actor wants to register / deregister his interest
• The intended (direct or indirect) recipient(s) of the information provided by the subsystem
• Any parameters of the provision needed such as Quality of Service parameters

But according to the IDL, register_interest_type contains a sequence of interest_type, which contains only the registration type (REGISTER or DEREGISTER), the recipent, and quality of service. The message has no way to specify a service or information within a service; the first two bullet points in the requirements above.

Defer to 3.1 RTF

This issue was raised against OARIS 2.0 and transferred into the OARIS 3.0 FTF very recently and after the comment deadline. In order to not delay the OARIS 3.0 FTF it is proposed to defer this issue for resolution in OARIS 3.1 which will be chartered at the successful conclusion of this FTF.

The specification and the file Perform_Splash_Spotting.idl have multiple misspellings of spotting as "splotting". For example, confirm_reposition_splash_splotting_area, receive_splash_splotting_area_position, receive_splash_splotting_area_track.

Correct instances of splotting

Correct instances of splotting to spotting

Sparx Enterprise Architect A (build v 16.1..1626) reports that the OARIS v3 beta (also v2 beta) XMI document is in XMI Version 1.1 - which is no longer supported by recent versions of EA.

Suggest specifying XMI 2.1 schema in source tooling and reissuing for compatibility.

Export XMI in XMI 2.5.1

When publishing from EA, ensure that UML 2.5 (XMI 2.5.1) is chosen as the export format.

The acquire and release mastership messages have only a "count" field. There is no way for the radar to determine which system is requesting or releasing mastership. The radar needs to know the identity of the master when reporting mastership. Suggest adding a subsystem ID to acquire and release mastership messages.

Issue is duplicated by OARIS3-19

Issue is duplicated (in part) by OARIS3-19. The resolution for OARIS 3-19 will resolve this issue.

The notes field for the ONLINE state in the Technical State state machine has a typo - viathe. The notes field has other subtle differences in comparison to the corresponding enumeration attribute.

fix the typo in the notes for the ONLINE state

Fix the typo in the model. This does not affect the generated specification as the diagram and text is not present in the specification document

Can this please be checked. Looking at OARIS v1.1 changebar this documents the changes from v1.0 to v1.1. The changebar document published on v2.0 should therefore be the changes from v1.1 to v2.0. The document published shows the changes from version v2.0 to v3 beta 1

Not an OARIS 3.0 FTF Issue

Not an OARIS 3.0 FTF Issue

The C2INav Model refers to a package defined by OARIS 1.1.
OARIS 2.0 is about to be published and there are 2.1 RTF & 3.0 FTF in progress.

Does not apply to OARIS specification

This is an issue affecting C2INav and does not affect OARIS. There is a separate issue raised on C2INav (https://issues.omg.org/browse/C2INAV13-1)

The syntax for an optional string (parameter_range: string [0..1]) can cause confusion to parsers of the XMI as to whether the syntax is for being optional or fixed length.
Optional strings would be better defined as an optional TypeDef.

This affects parameter_range and typical_value in the descriptor_type struct within Subsystem_Domain -> Subsystem_Control

Create Typedefs for optional strings

replace the parameters which are of type string [0..1] with typedefs in the descriptor_type class

The sequence diagrams for Mastership Acquisition and Mastership Release show receive_acknowledgement and receive_error in response to acquire_mastership and release_mastership. However, acquire and release have no request_id to respond to. Recommend adding request_id and subsystem_id keys to acquire and release mastership.

Add subsystem and request parameters to acquire and release mastership

Add subsystem and request parameters to acquire and release mastership. Update the four sequence diagrams and table descriptions for the methods.

Section 8.2 mandates how topics and partitions should be used to include different subsystems into an OARIS based system.

However the approach mandated is not the only approach and other approaches may be used and be more suitable for a given use case. This section should be re-written to provide some guidance examples rather than mandates

Reword section 8.2

Reword section 8.2 to give guidance to a system integrator rather than mandate a particular approach.

The relationship between plot_association_type and sensor_track_type should be a composition such that the sensor track contains a collection of plot_association_type objects rather than a collection of references which can not be resolved as the plot_association_type does not have an id and is not published separately on another topic.

change plot_association relationship to composition

change the sensor_track_type to be a compostion of plot_association_types

The class plot_summary_type was expected to be a topic type, but it isn’t mapped to an operation in the PIM – so it isn’t. We need to add a suitable operation to the Provide_Plots or Provide_Sensor_Orientation interface.

Add plot_summary_type to method on Provide_Plots_CMS

Add a method write_sensor_plot_summary to the Provide_Plots_CMS interface taking a parameter of type plot_summary_type.

The plot_association_type contains both a plot_subsystem attribute and a plot_id attribute which contains a subsystem_id attribute.

These both refer to the same piece of information and therefore one is redundant and should be removed.

Remove plot_subsystem attribute from plot_association_type

Remove the plot_subsystem attribute from the plot_association_type struct

The exported XMI from the EA model has been generated with the option selected to alphabetically sort the attributes in the model. This does not affect the word specification but does impact the XMI and IDL.

Export XMI without alphabetical sorting enabed

For the 3.0 FTF submission, ensure that the XMI (and hence the generated IDL) has not had alphabetical sorting of attributes applied on export.

The PSM section of the document was omitted from the submission and should be re-instated

Re-insert PSM section

Re-insert the PSM section as written for the 2.0 standard into the 3.0 standard

There are 26 #Table# markers remaining in the specification document.
These need to be replaced with their proper numbers and subsequent tables renumbered.

Resolve Table number placeholders and renumber

Each of the 26 #Table# placeholders for table numbers in the specification document should be resolved to its proper sequential number (or omitted in the cases where there is no table) and subsequent tables renumbered accordingly.
Also remove heading for non-existent tables (e.g. for typedefs which have no attributes).

The GraphQL mapping in the specification and defined in the schema files leads to an unnecessarily complicated implementation of the standard and should be simplified

Regenerate GraphQL PSM with updated mapping

The updated mappings from PIM to GraphQL as incorporated into the TDAI beta spec and C2INav v1.1 RTF should be used. This generates a single schema for each standard avoiding class duplication, has a flatter structure with respect to endpoint methods, has less duplication with respect to input types and uses a simpler mapping with less duplication for inheritance (consistent with that also now used for DDS/IDL - see OARIS2-27). The proposed schema file is attached.

Heartbeat_Signal.idl has been removed from the distribution. Searching for receive_subsystem_heartbeat_signal and receive_cms_heartbeat_signal in the IDL returns no entries. The interface can’t be found.

Exchange Heartbeat is documented as a Compliance Level 2 interface in the IFS. It is documented at section 7.7.5.2. It can only be concluded therefore that the Heartbeat_Signal.idl file has been omitted by mistake.

It is noted that the documentation omits subsystem_id as per the other interfaces. This is an error?

Document omission of Heartbeat Signal as in-built in DDS PSM

In section 8.2 describe how Heartbeat Signal is also mapped to DDS in-built API methods (as well as Register Interest, already documented).

plot_count field of concentration_plot_cell_type is defined as unsigned long long 64-bit type, which causes issues with implementation languages and machine base type representation on 64-bit machines.
Is it viable for a count of the number of plots in this clutter reporting context to exceed 2**32 (4 billion)? Would unsigned long be sufficient, hence making implementation more machine-friendly?

Change type of plot_count attribute

The plot_count attribute in struct concentration_plot_cell_type should be an unsigned long (rather than unsigned long long). This has more than sufficient range of values for any application of the clutter reporting use case.

The Plot Reporting Use Case is confusing. For OARIS 1.1, the actual Plot structure was abstracted into a sub-type write_sensor_plot_type defined in Provide_Plots.idl. In OARIS 2.0, the IDL file Provide_Plots.idl has been removed, with the interface effectively reverting back to the OARIS 1.0 version with sensor_plot_type defined in Plot_Reporting.idl. Is this intentional or was an incorrect baseline used for creating OARIS 2.0? This may also explain why subsystem_id is also missing as per sensor_track_type.

Flattened Structure Is Intentional

This change is a consequence of applying the principal of flattening PIM methods with a single parameter consistently throughout the whole model when mapping to the DDS/IDL PSM (and also GraphQL).

The topic type for Plots should have been flattened in the same way as that for Tracks in v1.1. This has now been done for v2.0.

The mapping of specialisations duplicates the location of common attributes from the generalisation class into each option of the union. This is inconvenient for the software design of applications using the types.

Use a rationalised DDS/IDL inheritance mapping.

Update the mapping of generalization / specialization inheritance so that attributes of the generalization class are encapsulated into a base class, which then appears as an attributes of each specialization rather than each of the generalization attributes individually.
Also the generated enumeration values are missing the name of the generalization class in their IDL documentation comment.

The impacted IDL files are attached as per the proposed update.

The following attributes are not correctly linked in the XMI file
In class system_track_type: system_track_number, time_of_information
In class fault_type: event
In class service_health_type: health_state, health_state_reason
In class subsystem_health_type: health_state, health_state_reason
In class downlink_request_type: own_missile_track_id
In class uplink_report_type: own_missile_track_id
In class uplink_request_type: own_missile_track_id

(They are linked to an implicitly created Java datatype by the EA tool)

Fix linkage in the master EA file

For each attribute link the type to the actual class in the model rather than free text.

Text such as
"MethodTag: ea_guid =

"
appears in some tables in the specification.
These should not be there

Remove MethodTag markers in the specification document

Remove all instance of "MethodTag: ea_guid =

" from the tables describing methods

The identifier sensor_plot_equipement_assessment_type has a typo (extra E in equipment) in all places that it is mentioned in the document.

Fix typo in sensor_plot_equipement_assessment_type

Remove the additional 'e' from the name of the type in the model and regenerate all artefacts.

The PSM generation rules lead to a duplicate class name of performance_assessment_request_type in packages for the Sensor Performance use cases (one in domain model and one in the service model). This is undesirable and may lead to confusion and/or erroneous usage of the spec.

Rename performance_assessment_request_type

The class performance_assessment_request_type in the Sensor_Performance (Domain Model) package should be renamed to performance_assessment_parameters_type. This is arguably a better name and disambiguates in the generated PSMs.
Additionally, operations sim_mode_status in Control_Simulation clashes with a Domain Model class in the PSM and operations complete in Perform_Illumination & Perform_Missile_Downlink clash in the generated PSMs. These should be renamed to be more consistent and coherent:

• sim_mode_status to report_sim_mode_status
• complete to report_illumination_completed & report_uplink_completed respectively

The Provide Sensor Orientation use case would be more useful if there was a possibility to provide an origin for the sensor. In particular, it could be used in cases where the sensor is mobile with respect to the physical platform on which it is situated; particular to communicate field of view.
Equally optional coverage in azimuth and elevation would be useful.

Add optional origin and field of view to sensor orientation

To sensor_orientation_type:

• add an optional origin of position_coordinate_type
• add an optional azimuth_coverage of azimuth_interval_type
• add an optional elevation_coverage of elevation_interval_type
• add an optional origin_coordinate_specification of coordinate_specification_type

In the DDS/IDL PSM there is a circular dependency between the Track_Reporting and Sensor_Assessment packages in Sensor_Domain. This is because the by reference association to assessment types contain an assessment_objective_id_type which is defined in the Assessment package.
References in the other direction are intentional.

Move assessment_objective_id_type to Track Reporting

Typedef assessment_objective_id_type should be moved to the Track_Reporting package to resolve the circular dependency.

There is an erroneous attribute "long _id;" in struct concentration_plot_cell_type in Clutter_Reporting.idl

This is a PSM specific issue.

Correct aggregations in the Clutter Reporting domain model

Correct composition of clutter_map_cell_type by clutter_report_type so that it is navigable only from latter to former.

Correct composition of concentration_plot_cell_type by plot_concentration_report_type so that it is navigable only from latter to former.

The diagram files exported from Enterprise Architect for this FTF are in PNG format. These don't scale well as noted in AB review comments.

Export diagrams in SVG format

All the diagrams changed by the FTF should be exported in SVG and saved in a zip file alongside the PNG file that they replaced, so that the OMG editor can use these files to create the specification file for publication.

The enumerator DELETED has been reinstated back in track_phase_type. This does question why the enumerator was renamed NOT_USED in version 1.1, in preference for the use of topic delete. Actually, having reinstated DELETED back in the IDL over using topic delete is a benefit since it makes track lifecycle easier. It is also not clear how INACTIVE assists and how long a track stays in this state before it is LOST. This is not documented but assumed to be sensor specific.

Parameter track_phase_type changed between 1.1 and 2.0. DELETED that was removed in 1.1 is now back!
OARIS 1.1
// The detection lifecycle phase of the track
enum track_phase_type

;

OARIS 2.0
// The detection lifecycle phase of the track
enum track_phase_type

;

Remove DELETED attribute and specific delete operation

The reappearance of the DELETED attribute in the DDS PSM was an error. It was an unintentional consequence of a change of approach to DDS IDL generation.
Having added also added a GraphQL PSM that also has has technology specific convention for deleting data, it makes sense to remove this from the PIM as well. At the PIM level the ability for a sensor to indicate that it has deleted a track is required and should be added. This method would be mapped to DDS API and general GraphQL mapping for the PSMs.
The INACTIVE enumerate was added to the v2.0 proposal for the case of passive sensors where the signal is expected to be intermittent.

I used RTI's DDS tool to transform the OARIS 2.0 beta 1 IDL into C++ and Java and tried to compile it. I got errors involving the enumeration types identity_type in Common_Types.idl and health_state_type in Subsystem_Control.idl. Both have an enumeration literal named UNKNOWN. The generated C++ and Java have these in the same namespace so the code does not compile.

The full error when compiling C++ is below
./Subsystem_Control.h:436:5: error: redeclaration of 'UNKNOWN'
UNKNOWN
^
In file included from ./Subsystem_Control.h:23:0,
from ./Control_Battle_Override.h:24,
from ./Control_Battle_Override.cxx:31:
./Common_Types.h:133:5: note: previous declaration 'org_omg_c4i_Domain_Model_Common_Types_identity_type UNKNOWN'

I'm using rtiddsgen version 5.3.1.14 to transform IDL into C++ and Java. I don't know if this is a problem with the specification or if I need to find a way to transform the IDL into C++ and Java that uses separate namespaces for enumeration types. But I felt someone should know about this anyway.

This was the only issue preventing compilation of the generated C++ and Java. I changed one of the literals to something else and it transformed and built with no errors.

Change health UNKNOWN enum to UNKNOWN_HEALTH

Change to disambiguate the Health enumerate as this does not impact known implementations of the standard. And the values of the Identity enumerate reflect standard usage for identification.

new Optional attributes added to sensor_track_type, to include:
• track_quality
• time_of_first_detection
• time_of_last_detection
• priority
• amplitude
• activity_id
• sensor_function_id
• observed_function_id
• equipment_id
• platform_id
Some appear to be quite low level and applicable to plots rather than tracks. It is also not clear what some of the values are. The last 5 are not documented in the IFS to assist.

Document the mapping of associations in the DDS and GraphQL PSM

All these attributes are optional and whilst not expected to be applicable to (for instance) radar tracks generally, they are applicable (and indeed required) to support the data models of some of the additional sensors scoped by OARIS v2.0 (e.g. EW).
The PSM mapping sections (within section 8) do not discuss the mapping of (by reference) associations. This should be added, which would define the semantics of these attributes in the PSM. (Each of the attributes already has documentation in the PSM in the Beta version).

The parameter subsystem_id has been removed from sensor_track_type. The parameter subsystem_id was added in OARIS 1.1 and provided a few benefits to include ensuring samples being unique since it was used in key. Please can we have it back.

The same issue can be found in sensor_plot_type, perform_cued_search_type and report_cued_search_result_type. Not all interfaces have been checked, but assume the same issue exists elsewhere.

It is assumed that removing subsystem_id is not intentional and in error, since it is documented in the DDS PSM at section 8.2, but does not appear in the PIM in the earlier sections.

Suggest also that subsystem_id_type is changed from unsigned short to unsigned long. This aligns with other UK information models.

Reinstate subsystem_id to PSMs

subsystem_id was omitted from the DDS/IDL PSM mapping in error in the v2.0 proposal (change to PSM generation approach).
This attribute should be added back in to the DDS/IDL PSM files. One keyed attribute per topic type.
Note that the subsystem_id attribute continued to be described as being a key in topic structs in section 8.2.

Request_id_type is defined as unsigned long long 64-bit type, which causes issues with implementation languages and machine base type representation on 64-bit machines.
Uses of request_id_type in several places in the standard are to identify request-response cycles that don't typically operate at high volume or high rate.
So does request_id_type need such a large range? Would unsigned long be sufficient, hence making implementation more machine-friendly?

Change request_id_type to unsigned long

Change the representation of request_id_type to long so that mapping to implementation languages is consistent. (E.g. Java doesn't have unsigned types).
OARIS doesn't have usages of request_id that would exceed a need to generate new/unique values at greater than 1Hz. This supports a system lifetime of nearly 70 years before requiring the negative range.

The subsystem_id has been removed from the perform_cued_search_type and report_cued_search_result_type data types.

For the shape model aspects, a new parameter id of type long has been added to figure_ref_point_type in Shape_Model.idl. This is not documented in the IDL or in the IFS, and the intention is hence not clear.

Remove erroneous _id parameter

A parameter named _id has been generated into the figure_ref_point_type struct. This should be removed. It arises because the aggregation to rectangle_type is navigable both ways. This should be corrected to fix the issue (navigable only from rectangle to figure ref point). This will update diagram 7.29.
There is already an issue to fix/add back subsystem ids generally in the DDS/IDL mapping. This will fix the search topic types as well.

Issues with spec:
OARIS/1.1/PDF, formal/20-08-03

Ambiguous PIM/PSM definition:
Figure 7-41: Track Reporting - Sensor Track (Logical diagram)
Does not include in the sensor_track_type class:
org::omg::c4i::Domain_Model::Common_Types::subsystem_id_type subsystem_id;

Table 7-110: Attributes of IDLStruct sensor_track_type
Does not include :
org::omg::c4i::Domain_Model::Common_Types::subsystem_id_type subsystem_id;

track_phase track_phase_type Track phase (e.g. TRACKED, DELETED, LOST)
DELETED has been removed, but the enumerate renamed NOT_USED

Table 7-111: Attributes of IDLEnum track_phase_type
«idlEnum» DELETED Track has been deleted.
Should be:
«idlEnum» NOT_USED Note: Delete enumeration not used for DDS; dispose topic instance instead.

Duplicate of two separate issues

The issues raised duplicate the contents of two issue raised separately subsequently

The multiplicity for the association between a sensor_track_type class and a sensor_plot_type class is 1..* (one to many) in the model. This doesn't allow for tracks that aren't based on plots (explicitly or implicitly). A zero to many relationship would allow for this and correspondingly offer more flexibility to implementations without unduly compromising rigour.

Change multiplicity for based_on to zero to many

Change the multiplicity for the "based_on" role for association from sensor_track_type to sensor_plot_type to be "0 .. *".
Note that this change doesn't impact the corresponding IDL for the DDS PSM. This is because the lower bound isn't modelled; in both cases it is mapped to a bounded sequence (length 256) according to the role tag in the model (Length = 256).

IDLStruct sensor_track_type does not have notes for all attributes. "* optional *" is applied to only some of the optional attributes.

Add Notes to IDLStruct sensor_track_type

Add notes where missing and remove or replace the "* optional *" markers as these are redundant due to the multiplicity being stated as [0..1]

IDLStruct cued_search_report_type is defined as an optional sensor track id. However sequence diagrams for the Perform Cued Search use case have notes that expect a possibly zero length list of track ids to be returned.

Update diagrams to refer to an optional sensor track id

It is not clear that returning a list of track ids is desirable. In particular it is not clear in general that a sensor would be aware as to when the list was complete.
Therefore the interface method should stay the same but the behavioural model should allow for multiple responses. Subsystems may only implement sending a single response; CMS components may choose to process just the first or each one (and possibly overwrite).

The TrackID parameter of method dedesignate_target has type fire_control_channel_id_type. This is inconsistent. Particularly given it is possible to designate by position rather than by track the name should be FireControlChannelID to match methods receive_target_acquired and receive_fire_control_channel_released.
Actually the name of the receive_target_acquired parameter should be changed from FireControlChannel to FireControlChannelID for consistency too.

Correct Target Designation Parameter Names

In the Process_Target_Designation use case change the parameter names for consistency.

Sequence diagram artefacts such as InteractionOccurrence and ActivityPartition have generated documentation sections as if they were classes in some subsections.
These are supposed to be suppressed by the documentation generation process

Remove sequence diagram artefact subsections

Auto-generated subsections relating to model entity artefacts from sequence diagrams should be removed

There is a leading backslash in the Engagement Support section

Remove typo from Engagement Support heading

remove backslash typo

The process target designation use case in Engagement Support contains a specific error message. This should be deleted as the general use cases method raise_error is used in the interaction diagram. Using the general method is consistent with the design intent and the approach in the other OARIS use cases. (This reflects a failure to apply a design change/improvement consistently by the original submission team).

Remove specific error method

Remove method receive_target_designation_error

The specification shows Register Interest as a prepcondition to doing anything (e.g. figure 7.2). 7.8.5.1 Provide_Sensor_Tracks contradicts this by saying that either Register Interest or Provide Subsystem Services are required. However in at least one real world system using this standard, sensor tracks are successfully received without either of these. The standard should reflect the defacto use and remove registration from cases where it is not requried.

Map Register Interest and Provide Subsystem Services to DDS Discovery

These use cases are implemented by the built-in DDS discovery mechanisms when the DDS PSM is used

Everyting in the IDL has a redundant and innacurate "Version 1.0" attached to it. Many types have documentation that is meaningless, e.g.

            // a simple union type, to represent an optional value
            union sensor_track_position_accuracy_type switch (boolean)

Maintain version number in IDL files and add DDS PSM

Update IDL file template so that the version number reflects the version number of the OARIS standard. (I.e. Version 1.1 as a result of this RTF). This will provide direct trace and is easily achieved as the IDL is generated from the UML model.

The OARIS Specification lacks specific sections for PSM. For other standards there would be a Section 8 describing the DDS PSM and then referring to the IDL files.

"The type of the recognition_type is ‘short.’ This short number is mapped to a recognition_type. " manages to be wrong (it's an unsigned short) while carrying no useful information.

Expand on and correct notes for recognition type

Reflect that the type is unsigned short. Explain that a recognition type is an abstraction for a system or implementation specific taxonomy for the kind of tactical object detected by the track.

A sensor track should carry the identity of the sensor it originates from. Forcing out of band mechanisms (e.g. partition names in the DDS PSM) to be used adds to the complexity of solutions, especially for use cases such as logging where we don't neecssarily care where it came from as long as we know. A compound key would allow all present use cases of filtering etc to be supported.
The situation is particularly confusing for bearing tracks, where the standard apparently requires us to define a bearing with no means of defining the origin.

Add subsystem id attribute to DDS PSM Topic types

Making the source (or destination) of the data explicit in the application payload for DDS makes sense, does not put an unreasonable burden on implementations, can be done with minimal change to existing implementations and is clearly beneficial for the purposes of recording and analysis.
OARIS v1.0 continued to define subsystem_id_type (unsigned short) in package Common_Types, although it is unused by the specification. Its semantics remain applicable for this change proposal.
All DDS Topic types should have a key attribute subsystem_id of subsystem_id_type added. The Subsystem sets it to zero in the receive_sub_identification_data topic and is allocated a value to use in the receive_cms_identification_data response. Note that to disambiguate the multiple subsystems case, the CMS response must be published in a subsystem specific partition.
However, the use of partitions is useful for filtering at a data reader and provides a more robust mechanism for ensuring data is from the subsystem that it labelled as belonging to. Therefore, the partition convention employed in some existing implementations should be formalised within the (new) DDS PSM section.

The name suggests something like degrees latitude per second, degrees longitude per second; probably a usable unit but not one I have ever come across. It was certainly not where I looked when looking for course and speed. I did look at polar_velocity_type, found it was wrong and used cartesian intead, which was not what my subscriber was expecting.

Admittedly it is obvious once one finally drills down to the definiton of wgs84_velocity_type, but experience shows that at least this developer did not search that far.

Add further explanation to velocity_coordinate_type

Explain the nature and purpose of the 3 velocity variants. Add explanation to wgs84_velocity_type that reports velocity from the viewpoint of the object in terms of course and speed with optional angle of climb for changes in height.

It could be speed over ground or speed along direction of travel; with a steep angle of climb the two might be significantly different.

Add notes to the course and speed attributes

Clarify that course is relative to North on the WGS84 spheroid and that speed is the total speed within the spheroid in the direction of travel accounting for angle of climb.

The intended use Cartesian only full covariance classes and accuracy classes for each of the coordinate systems has caused some confusion amongst users of the specification. The intent needs to be more clearly described and explained.

Explain that covariance should be used as an alternative to accuracy values

Some sensors are able to provide a covariance matrix to describe uncertainty in position and velocity calculation as part of their processing. For other sensors accuracy values for each (or perhaps the only) measured quantity are more appropriate.
When constructing a sensor_track_type instance subsystems should use either one strategy or the other. This should be clearly specified in the notes for the covariance matrix, position and velocity accuracy attributes,.

The search use case allows a CMS to instruct a radar subsystem to search a volume of space. This could be used to cue the radar to an existing track. However, it maybe more natural to do this by reference to another sensor track (for instance the radar then has the opportunity to subscribe to updates to the existing track directly to assist in its search).

Add a cue to track method

Add a cue to track method to the search use case that cues by reference to another OARIS sensor track instance rather than to a volume relative to the sensor.

The notes for coordinate_specification_type refer to a NEGOTIATED attribute that does not exist in the relevant enumeration classes.

Remove Reference to NEGOTIATED in Notes

Remove NEGOTIATED text and description from notes. The attribute was deleted by the submitters prior to the final submission, but the notes were not properly cleaned up.

Particularly when reporting bearings from an off-board or otherwise mobile sensor it would be more convenient, natural and precise to report the bearing origin as part of the report rather than referring implicitly to some otherwise well-known origin as the spec currently states (e.g. by reference to another track).

Add Support for Explicit Origin Reference for Bearings

Extend coordinate_origin_type to include an Explicitly Specified enumeration. Add an optional WGS84 origin attribute to polar_position_type and polar_position_accuracy_type. It is only useful to explicitly specify the origin in an absolute coordinate system, if in a relative system the ultimate question of coordinate origin is still unresolved and must rely on implicit information.

When using the DDS PSM the meaning of a topic dispose is sometimes unclear, particularly in the case of a sensor track report as this has a delete/cancel attribute inherited from the PIM.

Remove cancel track attribute from DDS PSM

The DDS PSM in general maps PIM concepts to native DDS mechanisms wherever appropriate. This principle should be applied here and the cancel attribute for IDL struct sensor_track_type omitted from the DDS PSM. However, the enum ordering / positioning should be unaffected so as to maintain compatibility with other potential PSMs.

The classes latitude_coordinate_type and longitude_coordinate_type in Coordinates_and_Positions have a Unit tag = rad (for radians) and a Range from -pi/2 .. pi/2 and -pi .. pi respectively.
The notes for the class state degrees however.

Change Class Tags to be degrees

Change the tags for classes latitude_coordinate_type and longitude_coordinate_type to be the equivalent for degrees as opposed to radians.
This is consistent with implementations and the original submitters intent.

There is an additional_information in the track_reporting use case whilst there is an (abbreviated) additional_info attribute in plot_reporting.

It also appear as additional_information in tracking_control

Change name additional_info attribute name in sensor_plot_type

Change the name of Attribute additional_info in Class sensor_plot_type to additional_information. Update class diagram for sensor plot reporting, the attributes table and the reference in the descriptive text for the class.
This will also result in a corresponding change to the IDL for the DDS PSM.

It has been found that neither of these class names suggest that they contain course and speed as components. Therefore when wishing to report in terms of course and speed a developer failed (initially) to find the correct data structure.

Add WGS84 velocity explanations

This is a duplicate of previously raised issue (same source - different route).

The length of the subsystem parameter string types is contrained to a maximum of 32 characters. This is not long enough to accomodate a hierarchical naming scheme with (potentially long and) meaningful names at each level.
This issue only impacts the IDL for the DDS PSM. The specification at PIM level does not specify a maximum length.

Increase length of parameter_name attributes

Increase the length of the parameter_name attribute from 32 to 128 in the following classes in package Subsystem_Control
name_value_pair_type
parameter_name_type
name_error_pair_type
descriptor

There is a typo (missing 'n') in a parameter for the report_transmission_mode_state operation in the use case Manage Frequency Usage
trasmissionModeSetting should be transmissionModeSetting

Fix typo in parameter name

Change name of parameter to transmissionModeSetting from trasmissionModeSetting (add the missing 'n')

The description of the table for new interface for Sensor Orientation (in proposal 69) has the sensor plot detail in it, instead of the detail for the new interface.

i.e.
Method | Notes | Parameters
write_sensor_plot() | This method receives a individual plot update from the sensor. It is expected to be called periodically from the sensor. | sensor_plot_type plots The set of plots

should be
Method | Notes | Parameters
write_sensor_orientation() | Informs the CMS of the orientation of the sensor. | sensor_orientation_type orientation The orientation of the sensor.

Correct text for sensor orientation

Correct text describing the operations of the interface from that described by proposal 69 (a copy of previous section) to that as intended from the proposal description

Across several of the subsystem control, sensor control and sensor tracking use cases the mechanism for determing subsystem state are inconsistent and some cases do not allow for this without modifying the subsystem's state. CMS functionality will in many cases need to determing current state of the subsystem (without modification) - e.g. to present a control window to an operator.

(extract from Nick Davies email - Thales)
Looking at some of the sensor management and CMS use-cases, there seems to be 3 patterns used to obtain the state of the subsystems amongst the interfaces. Those patterns are essentially:

• Modify/Response
  The CMS issues a modification request to the subsystem. The subsystem will then call the CMS back with the new state (or old if unsuccessful); the state published will only include the attributes that pertain to the original modify request. The callback is mapped to the original request through a request ID attribute that is present in both request and response.
• Request/Response
  The CMS issues a report request to the subsystem. The subsystem will then call the CMS back with the current state; the state published will only include the attributes that pertain to the original report request. The callback is mapped to the original request through a request ID attribute that is present in both request and response.
• Notification
  The subsystem notifies CMS of the current state in an unsolicited fashion, either periodically or on state change

For each of the use-cases in detail:

• ‘Manage Subsystem Parameters’ use-case uses both request/response and modify/response – there is no callback interface for retrieving data.
• ‘Manage Frequency Usage’ use-case uses modify/response and Notification pattern. There is a ‘report_frequencies_state()’ method for notifying frequency state either periodically or on change, and also a ‘transmission_frequency_state’ method that reports the changed frequencies in response to a specific request. For transmission mode, however, there is only the modify/response mechanism – there is no way of discovering the transmission mode without setting a value.
• ‘Control Battle Override’ use-case uses the modify/response mechanism – there is no way of discovering the battle override state without setting a value
• ‘Control Emissions’ use-case uses the modify/response mechanism – there is no way of discovering the emissions state without setting a value first
• ‘Manage Technical State’ use-case uses all three patterns – there is a modify/response interface, a request/response interface and a pure notify interface
• ‘Manage Operational Mode’ use-case uses the modify/response mechanism and the request/response mechanism. However, the interface specifies that the response interface can also be used for ‘spontaneous’ mode change, where a request_id of 0 will be specified.
• ‘Manage Tracking Zones’ use-case uses the modify/response mechanism
• ‘Manage Transmission Sectors’ use-case uses the modify/response mechanism

As you can see, only ‘Manage Frequency Usage’ (part) and ‘Manage Technical State’ provide an interface that allow the subsystems to report their state unsolicited by the CMS. ‘Manage Operational Mode’ provides a definition of where it can provide state information unsolicited, but the standard only states that it will be used when the subsystem needs to change its own state; it does not say that it will also be used when it receives a request to change state from the CMS.

For the other use-cases, there are the following options:

• For the use-cases where the state is atomic, assume that the last value on the topic is the current value, not matter what request caused it to be populated. This can only be used for ‘Control Battle Override’ , ‘Control Emissions’, ‘Manage Frequency Usage’ (other part), ‘Manage Operational Mode’ – the others can allow only part of the state to be reported back, depending on what request initiated the published value. This still relies on the subsystem publishing its initial value on start-up.
• We can assume that all the interfaces use the approach specified in the ‘Manage Operational Mode’ use-case where the full state is reported on a request_id of 0. But then why not just define the interface without the request_id, always reporting all values?
• Where a request/response interface is specified, the CMS can poll periodically for the state. This only helps us with ‘Manage Subsystem Parameters’ out of those not covered in the options so far.

That leaves ‘Manage tracking Zones’ and ‘Manage Transmission Sectors’ where none of our options give us a mechanism for discovering the underlying state without changing it.

Emphasise CMS responsibility to initiate determination of initial state

Add paragraph below to the relevant use case descriptions (as identified in the issue).

"It is the CMS's responsibility to initiate the determination of initial state by making a request for information to the subsystem."

Following the revision to the DDS PSM mappings Manage Mastership now has empty topic types - this is illegal IDL. See OARIS-5 & OARIS-17.

Add count to manage mastership method

Add parameter count : unsigned long to methods acquire_mastership and release_mastership.

The revised DDS mappings lead to empty topic types in the Heartbeat Signal use case - this is illegal IDL. See OARIS-5 & OARIS-17

Add count to receive heartbeat method

Add parameter count : unsigned long to methods receive_subsystem_heartbeat_signal and receive_cms_heartbeat_signal

The system track class is now being used as a topic type and thus requires a key to differentiate individual instances. (See OARIS-3 & OARIS-13).

Add key stereotype to attribute system_track_number

The attribuite system_track_number for class system_track_type is to have a stereotype of "key". Consequently this attribute will be a key for the topic in the DDS PSM due to the PIM to PSM transformation mapping.

The receive_error method from the common_use_case interface is not used by some of the use case service interfaces, but rather these interfaces redefine such a method themselves. The service interface use cases are:
Provide_Health_State
Perform_Missile_Downlink
Perform_Illumination
Perform_Missile_Uplink
Register_Interest

Update services to use common use case method

Service Interfaces for use cases Provide_Health_State, Perform_Missile_Downlink, Perform_Illumination, Perform_Missile_Uplink and Register_Interest are to be updated to remove methods that are duplicates of the common use case interface.

The stand alone C++ mapping for general_polar_volume_type does not compile (at least for v6.4 of OpenSplice). This is because the fields within the union have the same name as as their type (also declared in that namespace). Therefore access functions hide the struct declaration below the point at which they are declared.

Suffix all Shape_Model class names with _type to make unique

Suffix each class name in package Shape_Model with '_type'. This is in accordance with the REG's modelling guidelines and is consistent with the rest of the specification. (Note that general_polar_volume_type already has _type suffix - no change required in that respect).

There is an operation in the CMS interface for use case Manage Frequency Usage named transmission_frequency_state and a type within the Sensor Control domain model named transmission_frequency_state_type.
In the DDS PSM, with the generated mappings, this leads to two types named transmission_frequency_state_type. This is at best confusing and can lead to code compilation difficulties (they are generated into different, but related, namespaces).

Rename manage frequency usage method as a response

Rename method transmission_frequency_state transmission_frequency_state_response to remove the ambiguity.

Track Extractor functions may need to know where the (rotating) sensor which is feeding the measurements is pointing at any moment in time. E.g. to know when plots on a particular bearing would be expected to be received. There is not an interface in the OARIS specification to do this, but it is functionally coupled to the provision of plots so the plot_reporting summary use case is a natural home for it.

Create Provide Sensor Orientation use case

A new use case within the Plot Reporting summary use case is created (alongside Provide Plots) to provide the sensor orientation to functions such as track extraction. The use case is placed at compliance level 2.
Following the modeling framework for OARIS, the use case interface (for the CMS) has a single method to provide the orientation of the sensor. The sensor orientation describes its angle (azimuth and optional elevation), the coordinate orientation (using enumerate from Common Types) and its time of validity.
The coordinate orientation allows for absolute or relative interpretation of angles and defines the zero point for elevation.
(XMI for the updated model is attached together with a document containing views of updated and new diagrams).

The UML model for OARIS (from which the specification is generated) contains two state transition diagrams to show the mandatory and superset of transitions between technical states. However, the specification does not include these diagrams (because of the generation template used). The specification consequently lacks some of the intended semantic detail for the class technical_state_type leading to a lack of understanding from users.

Add state transition diagrams to technical state type

The document generation should be amended to include state transition diagrams that are members of a class.
The missing state transition diagram will thus be included in the specification.

The naming convention for OARIS is to suffix all classes with "_type". This was laid down in the REG's modelling guidelines. The following classes don't follow this guideline: -
frequencies_set_request
freqency_range_set
all_frequencies_state
reported_frequency_state
selected_frequency_list
transmission_frequency_state

Rename Sensor Control Classes to have "_type" suffix

All classes in the Sensor Control domain model should follow the convention and have the _type suffix. Consistency will aid understanding and usability (particularly at the programming level).
This impacts: -
frequencies_set_request (to be deleted by proposal 58)
freqency_range_set (to be deleted by proposal 58)
all_frequencies_state
reported_frequency_state
selected_frequency_list
transmission_frequency_state
and also from other use cases: -
test_target_scenario_state
control_emission_state
test_target_scenario_common_parameter_target
test_target_scenario_independent_target
test_target_plus_scenario
test_target
test_target_scenario_id
test_target_scenario

In the Manage Frequency Usage use case, if the CMS requests a range of frequencies rather than a discrete set (see class frequency_set_request) then the response from the sensor subsystem does not properly model the subsystem adopting the requested state. Class selected_frequency_list contains a list of discrete frequencies. In particular a list with two frequencies in it is indistiguishable from the expected response to a request to use just those two discrete frequencies - as opposed to the range inbetween them.

Frequency band to designate a discrete or range of frequencies

The specification already contains an abstraction of the actual frequencies to use through the frequency band typedef. This class allows a discrete value to be mapped to particular frequencies supported by the sensor. The interface would be simplified without loss of flexibility or rigour by developing the semantics of the frequency_band_type such that it may refer to a discrete frequency or a frequency range.
The frequency_range_set class is then redundant (as a band may refer to a range) - a range of bands does not in general make sense as it would pre-suppose some logical organisation of the discrete frequency band type that it need not have. Consequently, the frequency_set_request union class is also redundant as there would only be the single way of representing frequency state on the interface as opposed to the current two styles; removing the union is a useful simplification.
The set_frequencies() method should both take a selected_frequency_list parameter mirroring the transmission_frequency_state() method.
Metadata pertaining to a frequency band (e.g. whether refers to a discrete frequency or a range) can be communicated using the Manage Subsystem Parameterts use case.

It is not clear from the design of the Manage Frequency Usage use case how the set of frequencies supported by the sensor is determined by the CMS.

Describe usage of report_frequencies_state to determine supported set

Update use case descriptive text and figure 7.104 to describe CMS potential usage of report_frequencies_state to determine the supported set (whether available, enabled or otherwise) before further modification is made.

The attribute sector_added :Boolean in class transmission_sector_type has no descriptive text. The semantics of this attribute are not readily deduced, nor can a coherent proposal for what they should be for all instances of the class be formed. For instance, it should be noted that the class is used both for the CMS to request a setting and for the Sensor to report its current state. Equally, there are not attributes to indicate that a sector has been or should be removed.

Remove attribute sector_added

Attribute sector_added from class transmission_sector_type should be removed as it is both ill-defined and also unnecessary. Both the CMS and a Sensor are able to deduce which sectors have been added, updated or removed (if necessary for their processing) as each sector has its own unique sector_id. Also, having an attribute sector_added etc. makes it possible for the data to be inconsistent - not a good feature.

The description of the Manage Transmission Sectors use case states that sectors with a particular transmission mode can be defined. However, this is not supported in the PIM model - for instance no suitable attribute on transmission_sector_type. Also there is a typo on the bullet heading for Transmission Mode Sectors within the description for this use case.

Add transmission mode to transmission sector type

By adding transmission mode to transmission sector type the transmission mode of a sector can be defined. The value of AUTOMATIC is suitable as a default value for the case where the CMS does not need to constrain the sensor.

These are generic fields used to describe responses following requests. They are published asynchronously to the original request – the request and response are associated with each other using a common request ID found in each.
The response information is a free-text String. Though this can represent useful information to convey directly to an operator, it does not allow a specific field to be identified at fault (the original request may be composed of a number of fields). Also, there may be several fields at fault.
I would suggest the following –
o Allow multiple denial/error reason fields to be associated with the response rather than just one
o Add an identifier to the field, which can be a generic string. The identity will be appropriate to the original response e.g. the parameter name at fault with appropriate namespacing, or a null value if the error message refers to the whole request in general (e.g. loss of communication). The format of the error identifier should be defined in the description of the request service/topic.
(From Nick Davies - Thales UK)

Allow multiple error reasons with parameter identifier

A rejecting request_ack should be able to refer to the particular fields that are at fault and to be able to identify multiple discrete errors (for requests with sets of parameters in particular - e.g. Manage Subsystem Parameters and Manage Transmission Sectors).
A new struct class denial_type with attributes for the existing reason and zero-to-many parameter reference (new typedef of string) should be added to the model. request_ack_type then composes zero-to-many of these.
<<idlStruct>> denial_type
+ reason : denial_reason_type
+ related_parameter : parameter_reference_type [0..*]

<<idlTypedef>> parameter_reference_type
(generalizes string)
Tag: Length = 64

compostion of denial_type by request_ack_type
denial_type role: name = element, multiplicity 0..*

The sensor_track_type class does not allow a track to not have a defined environment value. Whilst the environment may be known or assumed for most cases of a naval radar track, for other types of sensor this is not necessarily the case.

Environment should be optional in sensor_track_type

Make attribute environment optional in sensor_track_type - environment_type then continues to enumerate actual environments and so it is possible to use this type in a non-optional (mandatory) context to define an object as being in a definite environment.

It is inconsistent to define an identity_type field for use with system_track_type class but to then not have the option to use it with the sensor_track_type class.

Add an identity attribute to sensor_track_type

Add an optional sensor_track_pre_identification attribute with type identity_type to sensor_track_type. This is the sensor's view of the tracked object's identity for cases where a sensor has such a capability.

The operation of the Manage Subsystem Parameters use case requires that the names of the parameters are unique within the scope of a particular subsystem. This is not well described in the beta specification.

Add uniqueness notes to description of parameter_name values

The Manage Subsystem Parameter names use case requires parameter names to be unique within the scope of a subsystem.
This should be documented for each applicable attribute in the spec (domain model classes) and in the description of the use case (service model interface)

The IDL for this struct has an '_id' member. This is due to generation of the IDL from the PIM, with the PIM having set the navigability for the aggregation within service_indication_list_type in the wrong direction.

Correct navigability of service indication set composition

Set navigability to be from service_indication_set_type to service_indication_type (and not in reverse direction).

(This will prevent _id attribute being generated in updated set of IDL for DDS PSM).

Class descriptor, supporting use case Manage Subsystem Parameters, contains an attribute called range. This is a reserved word in Ada and leads to compilation errors in code generated from the OARIS model.

Change name of attribute to parameter_range

Change name of attribute range in class descriptor in package Domain_Model.Subsystem_Domain.Subsystem_Control to parameter_range.

Changing the name to parameter_range is both more descriptive and consistent with other attribute names for the type (parameter_name, parameter_type & parameter_unit). It also avoids clashes with names from other language specifications.

identification_response_type from the domain model, supporting the Provide Subsystem Idenitification use case, contains an 'accept' enumeration. This is a reserved word in Ada and hence automatically generated code does not compile.

Fix by using Common Use Case Interface

Remove problem classes and use Common Use Case Interface methods instead. (As per REG's Modelling Guidelines).