Fix documentation on FeatureData messages #792
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
thomassedlmayer
added
Documentation
thempen
added
the
ReadyForCCBReview
PhRosenberger
approved these changes
Mar 25, 2024
pmai
approved these changes
Mar 25, 2024
|
CCB 2024-03-25: Merge as-is. |
pmai
added
ReadyToMerge
- Edit architecture overview concerning FeatureData/top level messages - Remove FeatureData specific adoc - Move contents to sensor_data.adoc Signed-off-by: Thomas Sedlmayer <tsedlmayer@pmsfit.de>
Signed-off-by: Pierre R. Mai <pmai@pmsf.de>
pmai
force-pushed
the
fix/feature-data-toplevel-doc
branch
from
e9f7c49
to
f7b5409
Compare
jdsika
reviewed
Apr 24, 2024
| @@ -7,7 +7,8 @@ endif::[] | |||
| OSI contains an object-based environment description that uses the message format of the https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/wiki[Protocol Buffer] library. | |||
| Google developed and maintains the Protocol Buffer library. | |||
| OSI defines top-level messages that are used to exchange data between separate models. | |||
| Top-level messages define the `GroundTruth` interface, the `SensorData` interface, and – since OSI version 3.0.0 – the interfaces `SensorView`, `SensorViewConfiguration`, and `FeatureData`. | |||
| Top-level messages define the `GroundTruth` interface, the `SensorData` interface, and – since OSI version 3.0.0 – the interfaces `SensorView` and `SensorViewConfiguration`. | |||
| Further top-level messages that were added in later versions of OSI are `TrafficCommand`, `TrafficUpdate`, `MotionRequest`, and `StreamingUpdate`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@thomassedlmayer Don't we have TrafficCommandUpdate as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The TrafficCommandUpdate is not mentioned anywhere in the documentation. It is even missing in Figure 3 on the architecture overview page. If it is supposed to be a top-level message, this should probably be included with additional documentation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for finding that little sentence in the OSMP docs! ;) Didn't expect it there.
To keep it consistent, this message should also have an additional page in section 2.2.2 with proper documentation. It would also make sense to integrate it into Figure 2 and 3.
jdsika
reviewed
Apr 24, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed in the last Performance/Packaging WG meeting, I created this pull request to remove any comments from the documentation that suggest that FeatureData could be a top-level message. Since FeatureData does not even contain the simulation timestamp, it can not be used as a top-level message at present anyway. This probably was an oversight from earlier documentation activities.
Resolves #771