[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] date effectivity
Since we aren't using events (as I understand it),
classification of the activity would be best bet.
However, where a configuration record is definately
required, a dummy start_date might work, if it were also classified
appropriately.
It does not make sense to use a '$', '/NULL'
etc., as the name of the class for a date, nor can you use one of these in place
of the date_or_date_time_assignment.assigned_date attribute (nor the template).
But a sub-class of 'actual_start' and/or 'planned_start'
such as 'unknown_start' might make more sense when applied to the date
assignment.
regards,
Tim
NB I note that 1,1,1 (year, month, day) is a valid
instantiation for a calendar date (in the model).
From: Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] Sent: 08 February 2006 09:06 To: kreilerc@mantech-wva.com; 'Gordon Robb'; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] date effectivity If that information is available, yes you can use it. The issue is that the only date information that I have, is the date when I remove a component. Hence, I would like to set the end effectivity date and leave the start effectivity unknown
Regards ------------------------------------------- -----Original
Message-----
What about using the start date of the next higher assembly? This would make an assumption that the part was on the original assembly when put into service. Thoughts?
From: Gordon Robb [mailto:gor@lsc.co.uk]
Hi, I would suggest that your option in respect to a feedback activity classification is the CORRECT one. There could be thousands of components on a aircraft or any other product that the fitted date is not known. Zero filling or a dummy date is of little value.
Gordon
DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]