Open tdepuyt opened 6 months ago
The clarification would only apply if the PS was updated, and in any case the 3rd digit may not match the FC (which could have its own independent clarifications).
IMO the version number shouldn't be present in PRSP; PRSP/PRED should be similar to ENSP/ENED. However, changing this would require a change to the PS (and would probably break our current testbed implementation).
ENED definitely a problem - has been updated and reflected in https://github.com/iho-ohi/S-101-Test-Datasets/commit/e0226ca4ce94019b4fc5b68d8c389d86b1f7a80b Edition 7/8 of cells pushed into repo. I believe we've already discussed the issue of the final digit already, and also at TSM. If we want to truncate to 1.2 we can. I think we need to capture it somewhere, even if it makes no difference in terms of compatibility though. At TSM we agreed the final digit (and any string) would be ignored in terms of versioning so maybe it's ok to have it in PRSP/PRED and implementations can just drop it.
ENED should be 5.1 not 1.1.
For PRSP and PRED, the S-101 Product Specification shows 1.2 not 1.2.0. Are we allowed to put the clarification value in those fields or must it just be the edition/revision values?