299 sdpi ri for r14 #302
Merged
299 sdpi ri for r14 #302
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Created place holder for the requirements glossary in the specification introduction section.
Updated the core requirements model (added IHE Profile) and some of the text in the subsequent table.
Incremental updates to the requirement documentation for IHE Profile & Tech Feature
ToddCooper
added
the
RI+MC+RR
Closed
|
@d-gregorczyk & @JavierEspina & @mfaughn :
We'll discuss tomorrow on our SDPi Friday call. |
|
1. Craft an initial approach for linking requirements - @d-gregorczyk<https://github.com/d-gregorczyk> ... ideas? In AsciiDoc it is as simple as including <> anchor links, since we have those for every requirement…
I think the short answer is, “Yes”…as long as you keep maintaining everything in a single .adoc file. If you have any aspirations of ever breaking this up into multiple pages (i.e., linking requirements acorss multiple AsciiDoc files) then make sure you understand the difference b/w how you do an internal cross reference and a document to document cross reference, especially what is documented here<https://docs.asciidoctor.org/asciidoc/latest/macros/xref/>. I don’t think the <<link-to-something>> syntax works for interdocument cross references. If you go ahead and break things into several .adoc files and then use the xref macro to link them then you can choose to create everything as a single page using include statements or create multi-page output and it should still work
…-------------------------------------------------
Michael Faughn, Computer Scientist
Systems Interoperability Group
Software and Systems Division
Information Technology Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
(M) 828-226-1369
***@***.******@***.***>
[Image]
From: ToddCooper ***@***.***>
Date: Thursday, August 29, 2024 at 11:59 AM
To: IHE/DEV.SDPi ***@***.***>
Cc: Faughn, Michael R. (Fed) ***@***.***>, Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [IHE/DEV.SDPi] 299 sdpi ri for r14 (PR #302)
@d-gregorczyk<https://github.com/d-gregorczyk> & @JavierEspina<https://github.com/JavierEspina> & @mfaughn<https://github.com/mfaughn> :
For this release 1.4 incremental update to the requirements interoperability section of TF-1A, my thoughts are to:
1. Remove the too aspirational appendix content (esp. MBSE and SysML ... these may be a simple note but not sections)
2. Add detail to the metadata for each of the requirement types, with the current blocks providing a baseline
3. Add a requirements labeling / numbering section that will then help developers & users understand how each block should be crafted and the metadata assigned.
4. Craft an initial approach for linking requirements - @d-gregorczyk<https://github.com/d-gregorczyk> ... ideas? In AsciiDoc it is as simple as including <> anchor links, since we have those for every requirement; for JSON ... ? there are a few approaches like JSON-LD, JSON Reference, XLink, HAL ... (all from this blog entry<https://www.mnot.net/blog/2011/11/25/linking_in_json>)
We'll discuss tomorrow on our SDPi Friday call.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#302 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJW7IUW6RYYAA6APPU4PLLZT5OQDAVCNFSM6AAAAABNK3OO2WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMJYGUYTCOJTGE>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
@mfaughn ...
My real question was how we need to represent these relationships in the exported JSON file. We will have sufficient metadata included in the JSON export, BUT what is the best way to convert (?) these links? Remember that requirements interoperability includes being able to say that you have traceability from a high-level requirement (e.g., use case THEN clause) to where it is handled in the specification and ultimately the message element that would be tested. What does THAT look like in the JSON file? (outta here for today ... fun discussion tomorrow morning!) |
|
SDPi Friday 2024.08.30 Review - |
Changes include: 1) removed editors note at top of appendix - no longer relevant 2) added descriptive detail to the hanging gardens model 3) added detail to the core requirements model & elements 4) "cleaned up" other areas that were either stale (deleted) or were incomplete
Testing both linking requirements from one AsciiDoc file to another AND documenting content export to JSON.
that was misinterpreted by the converter tool
Start from scratch
Added in the profile AIPO metadata
note and simple requirement test content
into the requirement block text
from TF-1A to TF-2A
|
2024.08.30 Update -
|
…#300) (#303) * #152 Add discovery proxy transactions scaffold and actor description. * #152 Add more content; add ack message to transaction sequence. * #152 Tweak register message text * #152 Add DEV-47, apply tweaks von DEV-46 * #152 Add DEV-47 probe and resolve * #152 Various fixes * #152 Various fixes * #152 Add MDPWS binding contents for DEV-46 * #152 Add MDPWS binding contents for DEV-47; minor fixes to adhoc message excerpts * #152 Add MDPWS binding contents to outline. * #152 Fixes to DEV-47 * #152 Fixes to DEV-47 * Fix yml to use new versions of github action plugins * Fix yml to use new versions of github action plugins * #152 Update references to DEV-47 outlines * Replace gradle-build-action with newer setup-gradle * #152 Add discovery proxy sources and additional chapter * Change path of setup-gradle@v3 * Use setup-gradle@v4 * Use setup-gradle@v4 * Use setup-gradle@v4 * #152 Fix findings * DP Updates to TF-0 & TF-1 - Initial Initial updates to add a transaction name to the TF-0 Transactions listing + the SDPi-P Actor model update & transaction table update & placeholder for the DP option description section. * #152 Add discovery proxy basic sequence diagram * #152 Enrich OID table caption in the discovery proxy section * TF-1 Updates Updated DP TF-1 content, specifically to the SDPi-P transaction table, the Actors and Options section (with its own table) and the Discovery Proxy Option section. Content is rough but sufficient for discussion. * Updated Sequence Diagram & Actor Diagram Sequence Diagram - added secure groupings for all transactions Actor Diagram - simplified to "Discovery Proxy" Updated Change Log with #152 addition A fix to the TF-1 SDPiP Transactions table to re-enable rendering of the end notes ... hopefully! * Trying to Fix SDPi-P Transaction Table Notes Notes are not appearing on last row of the transaction table. Also changed the note numbering based on order from the top of the table. * Fixed SDPi-P Transactions Table Notes Found the extra vertical bar! * Updated DP Transaction Names & PUML Diagram Titles & SDPi Transaction Table Updates * Removed "SDPi" from many of the TF-2 transaction sequence diagram titles - transactions are not profile specific * Refactored DEV-46 and DEV-47 transaction names + reference label text * changed the DP transactions in the SDPi-P Actors & Transactions table to "O" vs. "C" * Integrated comments from David's review of the option bullets * Commented out the version text box from the options section but in the comments kept the potential future options,. * Updated TF-1 DP Option Text Converted the bulleted content into something readable and (generally) tagged. * #152 Fix formatting * #152 Fix formatting * #152 Try to fix wrong directory for PUML includes in CI * #152 Minor fixes * #152 Add more space to images, tables and listings. * Changed "SOMDS Discovery Proxy" to "Discovery Proxy" Left over changes * Editorial Updates based on review & DCC discussion Numerous updates including ... * removing "SOMDS" from "Discovery Proxy" actor name * Discovery Proxy actor brief description more generic * Use of "Transaction" for a specific transaction now uppercase "T" * Managed Discovery Option renamed (from Discovery Proxy Option) * Added "heartbeat" requirement for DP as part of managed discovery behaviour Others ... * Fixed PUML file name error Refactoring PUML file name inserted a space in the file name ... ! * Fixed another file name error Or didn't fix it previously? * Highlighted "shall" statements for review & requirements block addition #shall# added in option block to ensure review and either rewording, removal, or requirements block addition * Updates to Discovery Proxy Option & DEV-47 Title Changed include: * Reset "Transaction" to lowercase "transaction" per guidance from Mary J. * Simplified DEV-47 to "Retrieve Network Presence", leaving off "Metadata" * Added requirements blocks for the option "shall" statements * Transaction Description Updates + MD Option Updates * Updated DEV-46 & DEV-47 transaction summaries to match the updated transaction names * Added as a test, additional requirement metadata to the MD Option section * Changed the arrow direction of the Bye() message for DEV-47 * Test of Inter-Requirement Links Added forward / backward requirement anchor references to R1023. fingers crossed * Tweak update because workflow automation failed 2nd try at triggering build workflow * Updates from SDPi Friday Review Updates from review corrections. --------- Co-authored-by: David Gregorczyk <[email protected]>
Integrated the master branch, including the Discovery Proxy content Updated the TF-1A requirements model
Updates from TF-1A edits Update for CHANGELOG.md AsciiDoc labeling fix for "bibliography" Pushed publication date to September 13
Closed
|
Removed link to #299 since it is only partially addressed in this 1.4 release |
Closed
Updated the versioning information (to review notes are not hard wired) Updated change log Expanded content in the TF-1A discussion
…x Github request error.
Changed the release date to verify that this branch can now be pushed (by Old Man Cooper)
First full pass through RI for 1.4 content.
|
2024.09.16 - @d-gregorczyk @JavierEspina The content is now complete ... or as complete as it will be for this release 1.4. Please review and if ready-enough, Squash & Merge! |
d-gregorczyk
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
📑 Description
TF-1A Requirements Interoperability incremental update for SDPi release 1.4. Primary focus will be updates to the TF-1A section, both adding more detail to the Requirements Interoperability model + cleaning up content that is now dated (e.g., SysML 2.0 and MBSE ... both of which are valid but two years down the road, clearly not in the immediate future!).
☑ Mandatory Tasks
The following aspects have been respected by the pull request assignee and at least one reviewer: