Template:— representing_task_step (rep_task_step)
Capability:representing_task		 Date: 2010/01/28 09:39:51
Revision: 1.5
CoverContentsDescriptionModel diags.Input params.Ref. params.Instantiation pathInstance diags.CharacterizationsIssuesin situ

Issue raised against: representing_task_step

GENERAL issues

Closed issue Issue: JNN-1 by Johan Nielsen (2008-02-27) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Checklist clause 65: Task_step_identification_code and Task_step_name missing from OWL-file(s).
Comment: (Johan Nielsen 2008-02-27)
Fixed.

Closed issue Issue: PHX-1 by Patrick Houbaux (08-04-16) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Reject. Status: closed
Registered as a ballot comment by:

REPRESENTING_TASK_STEP has no uniqueness constraints
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 2010-01-28)
This issue has been rejected, due to the fact that there is no way to guarantee uniqueness just based on the task step id. Uniqueness of a task step needs to be put into the context of the Task id.

Closed issue Issue: GYL-1 by Leif Gyllstrom (2010-01-25) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed
Registered as a ballot comment by:

The input parameter Task_category can not be forced to be a class exisiting within the RDL. Most cases will probably use codes (or types) defined within legacy applications and must therefore use the assigning_code template. Proposal is therefore to remove the input parameter, and make explicit usage of either the assigning_reference_data or the assigning_code template, depending on the business case at hand.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 2010-01-28)
Fixed