Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add SSP as Packaging in Model Types #104

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 25, 2024
Merged

Conversation

ClemensLinnhoff
Copy link
Contributor

@ClemensLinnhoff ClemensLinnhoff commented Aug 28, 2023

Reference to a related issue in the repository

#102

Add a description

Since models, e.g. traffic participants, can consist of multiple connected FMUs, SSP was added next to FMU as a possible packaging for OSMP models.

Check the checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code.
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation for osi-sensor-model-packaging.
  • My changes generate no new warnings.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
  • New and existing unit tests / Github Actions pass locally with my changes.

Add SSP as possible packaging for OSMP models
@ClemensLinnhoff ClemensLinnhoff requested review from pmai and jdsika August 28, 2023 12:38
@ClemensLinnhoff ClemensLinnhoff added the ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. label Feb 26, 2024
@pmai
Copy link
Contributor

pmai commented Feb 26, 2024

CCB 2024-02-26: @pmai will provide a more expansive formulation that clarifies the relationship of OSI vis-a-vis SSP, to be re-reviewed in next CCB.

@@ -35,3 +35,5 @@ All models may also consume a global `osi3::GroundTruth` parameter during initia

Complex models may combine various aspects of the above model types.
Manual intervention is needed to configure and set up these FMUs.

In implementations that support the use of the _System Structure and Parameterization_ (SSP) standard, a model can alternatively be packaged as a system consisting of multiple FMUs, if it presents the same interface at system level as this specification gives for the overall model of the given type.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the word "gives" after specification correct?

Copy link
Contributor

@pmai pmai left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CCB 2024-03-25: Merge as-is with change.

doc/spec/model_types.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@pmai pmai added ReadyToMerge and removed ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. labels Mar 25, 2024
@pmai pmai merged commit f695fc7 into master Mar 25, 2024
5 checks passed
@pmai pmai deleted the add-ssp-in-type-definition branch March 25, 2024 11:28
@pmai pmai added this to the V1.5.0 milestone Apr 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants