Open bergtwvd opened 2 years ago
dr-cgf-home
commented
2 years ago ForceSides have a name property whose value can be set to whatever is appropriate in an exercise. There could be many sides for different coalitions, militias, non-military organizations, etc. in an exercise. Are you suggesting that some standard names be defined for the simpler cases, e.g. "BFOR", "OPFOR", "NEUTRAL", etc.?
bergtwvd
commented
2 years ago I am not suggesting any name. As it stands now SIMs and other APPs need to have knowledge on what force side is the "friendly" side, so - for instance - the DIS/RPR force identifiers as well as the used symbology can be initialized appropriately.
For CWIX 2022 (MSG-201) the implicit assumption was that the first listed force side in the LOX INI document is the "friendly" force side (where is this documented?).
In this exercise our viewer could be dynamically configured to be in a certain force side, and the symbology color on the screen changed accordingly. But the fact that something is red or blue depends on the "reference" force side - for LOX INI the first one in the document.
jmpullen2
commented
2 years ago Tom,
Because of the issue you address below. Initially I was not a fan of the ForceSide structure for C2SIM, as developed by the C2SIM ontology group. But I have learned that the fact that "I would not have done it that way" doesn't mean it must be done my way - if it works and is not too difficult to implement, I consider that "best is the enemy of good enough".
Doug Reece has convinced me that the generic presentation of ForceSide is a good enough way to represent the entire C2SIM initialization in one xml file - in fact, maybe the best way.
As an example, I'll attach a C2SIMInitialization file from the workshop
I held recently to close off MSG-194. Here is the friendly ForceSide
from the attached:
In this case the name Doug mentioned is NATOCoalition. The associated issue you raise is the how to tell that NATO is the blue side. You must either have a rule as to which of the three ForceSide is blue (e.g. it is the first in the file), or establish that value elsewhere in your code. For VRForces we found this quite simple to do. The benefit is then that the coalition and its OPFOR need only a single initialization file. The alternative thus avoided is having to produce a separate C2SIM Coalition for each ForceSide.
Mark
Mark
bergtwvd wrote on 10/25/22 4:11 PM:
I am not suggesting any name. As it stands now SIMs and other APPs need to have knowledge on what force side is the "friendly" side, so - for instance - the DIS/RPR force identifiers as well as the used symbology can be initialized appropriately.
For CWIX 2022 (MSG-201) the implicit assumption was that the first listed force side in the LOX INI document is the "friendly" force side (where is this documented?).
In this exercise our viewer could be dynamically configured to be in a certain force side, and the symbology color on the screen changed accordingly. But the fact that something is red or blue depends on the "reference" force side - for LOX INI the first on in the document.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/OpenC2SIM/C2SIMArtifacts/issues/39#issuecomment-1291081262, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABN7HSNPJUENVYJ2CDKFOZDWFA5HHANCNFSM6AAAAAAROAGVVE. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
C2SIM Problem Report / Change Request Submitter Name (s): Tom van den Berg Contact email address: Berg, T.W. (Tom) van den tom.vandenberg@tno.nl Submitter Organization(s): TNO Date of Submission: 26 October 2022 Type (Problem Report or Change Request): Problem Report Product: Land Operations Extension Problem/Change Description: Force side information is included in the schema, but the question is who it the "BFOR" side? All SIMs must follow the same interpretation w.r.t. the interpretation of force sides. This needs to be clarified in either the LOX schema and/or the associated documentation (operating agreements).