Open Issues

• Issue 07B-1: The current order constraint in 1232-2002 is difficult to understand and, therefore, difficult to use. The DMC decided to “minimalize” the order constraint to focus only on preconditions and added actions to the model. It is recognized that this minimalist construct is at best suboptimal and possibly “broken.” Unfortunately, timing prevents a new construct being included in the model, and the DMC felt something needed to be there to address ordering. For the next revision, a more expressive and usable order constraint facility needs to be incorporated into the model, replacing the current minimalist construct. One proposal on hand is Log #451.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 09B-01: Post-2010 revision of AI-ESTATE to include constructs, facilities, and services to support PHM (especially prognostics). Specific examples that must be covered include gray-scale health and time-to-fail.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 09C-01: It is unclear that the subcommittee has the resources, knowledge, background, etc., necessary to standardize on “operational context” for either diagnostics or prognostics. For that matter, given that context is domain specific, we are not sure that it is even possible.

Status: OPEN Low Priority

• Issue 10A-01 Deprecation issue -- there are elements such as hardwareitem in 2007 Test Results that are replaced by, for instance, c:hardwareinstance. These replacements will break existing applications if proper namespace management is not used. The old Test Results namespace for 2007 will be made available on the SCC20 website for some period of time to support deprecation. New applications should map to the 2009/2010 version of the namespace.
  
  1232 uses the OID namespace management mechanism. Should 1636 standards use this for consistency, or should they follow ATML namespace conventions….???

A possible solution would be to create an OID for Test Results (and eventually one for SIMICA Common) and map the OIDs to the ATML namespaces, thus preserving both approaches. It is also possible that no mapping is required, depending on whether the OID is even necessary without a Part 28 XML schema being derived.

Status: OPEN High Priority

• Issue 10A-02 There is an issue of how to harmonize SIMICA Common and ATML Common.

Status: OPEN High Priority (STATUS: PAR 1636.99 document in work to address this issue. Awaiting creation of SCC20 task group to harmonize across all working groups.)

• Issue 10C-01 Although ATML Common contains a WorkOrder complex type, the SimicaCommon.xsd still includes a WorkOrder complex type and it has different attributes. Our SIMICA Common information model matches the correct version in ATML Common. WorkOrder should be deleted from SIMICACommon.xsd and be replaced with a reference to WorkOrder in ATML Common.

Status: CLOSED After reviewing both the XML and information model in 1636.99 and ATML Common, we found that the two versions of Work Order were consistent.

• Issue 10C-03: Need rules to enforce levels and mutual dependencies between RepairItem-FunctionItem-Failure-Fault mapping in 1232 CEM.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10C-04: In AI-ESTATE the current semantics won’t support representing multiple disjoint ambiguity groups.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10C-05: 1232 FailureDistributions are currently expressed in terms of time, however some applications express FailureRates in terms of cycles. AI-ESTATE should support this.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10C-06: AI-ESTATE DLM EXPRESS needs to be updated with constraints that limit easily identified nonsense rules.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10C-07: AI-ESTATE FTM EXPRESS needs a rule to ensure the tree is acyclic.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10C-08: AI-ESTATE CEM needs to be examined to determine role and use for FailureMechanism.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10D-01: The current version of the DCM does not support recording multiple repeated outcomes for a test or action at a single step. Some reasoners may make use of this information, in which case we need to provide a way to track the history of those observations. Whether and how we want to record multiple observations will be addressed in a future revision.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10D-02: The current version of the DCM does not support recording the number of resources utilized at a single step. Some reasoners may make use of this information, in which case we need to provide a way to track this value. Whether and how we want to record resource quantity will be addressed in a future revision.

Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 10D-03 - Test Results and the ATML standards try to support too many use cases and therefore have numerous optional elements. Mike Seavey suggests that for long term solution of reducing the number of elements we may need to subdivide the schema for different applications, each of which would appear in a different dot standard. Another solution would be to have a single standard with schemas to support subdomain application use cases. We need to think about this for Test Results and possibly MAI.
  
  Status: OPEN High Priority

New Issues:

• Issue 11B-01 – Test Results, MAI, and AI-ESTATE all make use of similar concepts related to Action, Test, Repair, and Diagnosis. Currently, the semantics, as defined in each of the respective standards, is different (sometimes subtly and sometimes not). As a SIMICA Common and eventually SCC20 Common are developed, these will need to be harmonized.
  
  Status: OPEN Medium Priority

• Issue 11B-02 – Test Results and MAI both have constructs for Repair/Repair Action. They probably need to be harmonized. They will also need to be harmonized with the Repair Action in AI-ESTATE. As a SIMICA Common and eventually SCC20 Common are developed, these will need to be harmonized.
  
  Status: OPEN Medium Priority