Open racheliurui opened 5 years ago
The naming showing in XML payload will always be "EquipmentLevel", so the backend element naming with or without "Element" doesn't matter that much.
Thus I support this change if it will make the XSD better aligned with Standard.
Rachel, do know if your statement above is true in JSON or Protobuf
Rachel, do know if your statement above is true in JSON or Protobuf
Hi, Charlie, I reckon it's the same with JSON or Protobuf, as, in payload, we never see a tag name has "1" in it. And when we do the transformation to photo buff schema, I have to transform those definition with name contain "1" as the tool won't support definition with that complexity.
Agreed again.
Align BatchML-BatchInformation.xsd with B2MML-Common.xsd:
EquipmentElementType in BatchInformation.xsd has the EquipmentElementLevel element for EquipmentLevelType in Common.xsd since ISA-88 uses Equipment Element Level as an attribute compare to the Equipment Level attribute in ISA-95. The two attributes represent the same equipment level defined values and definitions; And so should use the same type in Common.xsd.
The support the ISA-88 and ISA-95 elements the following change was made and recorded in original comment above.
ERDi, MESA: complexType name="HierarchyScopeType",
CHANGE:
<xsd:element name="EquipmentLevel" type="EquipmentLevelType"/>
xsd:choice>
I agree to the change.
Background MESA may not make this change. ERDi should. Align BatchML-BatchInformation.xsd with B2MML-Common.xsd:
Impacted Types and Solutions To align with updated ISA950002 and ISA880002, Change the following,
TO:
TO: complexType name="EquipmentLevel1Type