Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

docs(dt): prepare for R24-03 #654

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Mar 7, 2024
Merged

docs(dt): prepare for R24-03 #654

merged 18 commits into from
Mar 7, 2024

Conversation

arnoweiss
Copy link
Contributor

@arnoweiss arnoweiss commented Feb 8, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Description

This PR prepares the DT Kit for R24-03. While there are no changes to the relevant standards for said release, there were a couple of clarifications, bugs and new sections detailing concepts that were requested. Namely:

Includes all changes from unmerged #584 also closing

Closing #568
Closing eclipse-tractusx/sig-release#508

Pre-review checks

Please ensure to do as many of the following checks as possible, before asking for committer review:

BirgitBoss
BirgitBoss reviewed Feb 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
docs-kits/kits/Digital Twin Kit/Software Development View/page_interaction-patterns.md Outdated

#### 2.2. Discovery by Registration

Additionally, the dismantler must signal in a [BPN-Discovery-Service](../page_software-operation-view.md) that he indeed has data on said vehicle.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

he or she

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Via the BPN Discovery Service it is not possible to decide whether the dismantler has information on a specific vehicle. It is only possible to find the BPN of the dismantler so that in a subsequent steps the data consumer can look for twins in the Digital Twin Registry of the Dismantler for this specific vehicle.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right, but the dismantler would not register with a certain assetId if they didn't have data on said asset. For all cars the dismantler does not have data on, they don't register at the BPN Discovery Service.

BirgitBoss
BirgitBoss reviewed Feb 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
docs-kits/kits/Digital Twin Kit/Software Development View/page_interaction-patterns.md Outdated
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------------------|
| A new customer wants their customerPartId as specificAssetId on the twin. | - Data Provider (Supplier) <br/> - Data Provider (Third Party) | 1. Third Party knows an id of the asset | None yet |

An update to a twin is any change to the ShellDescriptor via the APIs of the AssetAdministrationShellServiceSpecification
Copy link
Contributor

@BirgitBoss BirgitBoss Feb 8, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This use case is - at least this is what I understand - about changing the submodel that is registered in the Registry for this twin. So the registry information about this twin is not changed at all. Only if there is version information of the submodel contained in the registry (but this is optional)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's about arbitrary changes to a shell-descriptor. Adding submodels when onboarding use-cases, changing submodel-interfaces in migration scenario...

BirgitBoss
BirgitBoss suggested changes Feb 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@BirgitBoss BirgitBoss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thank you for this section on interactions. See comments for recommended and requested changes.

BirgitBoss
BirgitBoss reviewed Feb 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
docs-kits/kits/Digital Twin Kit/Software Development View/page_interaction-patterns.md Outdated
(and by proxy CX-0002). The data provider deploys at least:
- Digital Twin Registry (DTR)
- registered in a DSP-conformant connector offering the DTR to the Dataspace.
- registers Digital Twins (AssetAdministrationAAS-descriptors - or AAS descriptor - in AAS vocabulary) with assetIds
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- registers Digital Twins (AssetAdministrationAAS-descriptors - or AAS descriptor - in AAS vocabulary) with assetIds
- registers Digital Twins (AssetAdministrationAAS-descriptors - or AAS descriptor - in AAS vocabulary) with assetI IDs
Suggested change
- registers Digital Twins (AssetAdministrationAAS-descriptors - or AAS descriptor - in AAS vocabulary) with assetIds
- registers Digital Twins (AssetAdministrationAAS-descriptors - or AAS descriptor - in AAS vocabulary) with asset IDs

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is not "assetId" attribute, there is the globalAssetId and there are specificAssetIds.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

part 2 of the AAS spec, p. 113, bullet point 13 introduces the term as the union of specficAssetIds and globalAssetIds.

maximilianong
maximilianong requested changes Feb 21, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@maximilianong maximilianong left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed for release 24.03.
Please clarify the inline comments.
And have a look into the release-issue: eclipse-tractusx/sig-release#508

Changes need to be adapted til the 4th of March.

docs-kits/kits/Digital Twin Kit/page_adoption-view.md Outdated
standard can be found in the [Catena-X standard library](https://catena-x.net/de/standard-library).
The following figure is also a non-normative part of CX-0002 "Digital Twins in Catena-X" v2.0.0. It explains the realtions
between terms used in this Kit and the domain of Digital Twins in Catena-X.
All standards can be found in the [Catena-X standard library](https://catena-x.net/de/standard-library).
![How words relate in the DT Kit](assets/img/DTKIT_terminology.svg)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this image owned by Catena-X e.V.?
If yes, please add license information according to: https://eclipse-tractusx.github.io/docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-07/

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed this one entirely. The association grants to rights to its standards or their content, it appears.

docs-kits/kits/Digital Twin Kit/page_software-operation-view.md

![High Level Architecture of an App leveraging the Digital Twin Kit](assets/img/DTKIT_high_level_arch.svg)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this a self created image especially for the KIT please follow: https://eclipse-tractusx.github.io/docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-07

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TRG-7 says "if a figure in docs is self-created, the ##NOTICE paragraph at the end of the file is sufficient." The Adoption View already has one.

@danielmiehle danielmiehle self-requested a review March 6, 2024 07:31
@maximilianong maximilianong self-requested a review March 6, 2024 07:31
@danielmiehle
Copy link
Contributor

@arnoweiss thank you for doing the changes. can you please check the dependency error:

image

maximilianong
maximilianong previously approved these changes Mar 6, 2024
View reviewed changes
danielmiehle
danielmiehle previously approved these changes Mar 6, 2024
View reviewed changes
@maximilianong
Copy link
Contributor

@arnoweiss can you please look into the conflict? :D

@arnoweiss arnoweiss dismissed stale reviews from danielmiehle and maximilianong via e83eebb March 7, 2024 08:38
@arnoweiss arnoweiss marked this pull request as ready for review March 7, 2024 09:20
@danielmiehle danielmiehle merged commit f703119 into eclipse-tractusx:main Mar 7, 2024
4 of 5 checks passed
@carslen carslen mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2024
Closed
@kelaja kelaja mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2024
Closed
15 tasks
@arnoweiss arnoweiss mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2024
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@BirgitBoss BirgitBoss BirgitBoss requested changes

@danielmiehle danielmiehle danielmiehle approved these changes

@maximilianong maximilianong maximilianong approved these changes

@SebastianBezold SebastianBezold Awaiting requested review from SebastianBezold

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@arnoweiss @maximilianong @danielmiehle @BirgitBoss