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
MCP-0033 Predefined Plots: comments on specification #2578
Comments
Clarify that behavior is unspecified for: - Curves where x or y does not designate a variable - Unknown units or incompatible with the plotted variable
That was a decision made at some design metting to simplify the proposal inorder to be able to specify something useful quicker. As you say we can always revisit it in the future and extend it with support for styling.
I created a PR for that: #2579.
Am not aware of that we talk about optional features in the specification, I thought the usual wording for features that are kind of optional is to say that it's tool specific. In that sense links are optional: The styling of the link text and the link action is left for each Modelica tool to decide. For variable replacement I'm reluctant to call them optional, but it might be a good idea to define what should happen if a tool cannot replace the variable (for whatever reason). |
For connectorSizing, the current specification says:
Hence my suggestion would be:
|
I would avoid writing it that way, as it makes it sound as if a valid implementation doesn't need to do anything to the substring
|
Incorporate suggestions from #2578
I added this to the https://github.com/modelica/ModelicaSpecification/milestone/74 milestone so that the part remaining after merging #2579 can be discussed, namely how to formulate the specification of variable replacements. As indicated above, I think that the current formulation is the right one, but a compromise to meet the request in this issue might be to add some non-normative text to clarify that implementing variable replacements doesn't have to be hard… |
Having implemented (most of) MCP-0033 in Dymola, we have a few comments on the specification and suggestions for minor changes. In any event, our conclusion is that the MCP is ready for inclusion in the specification.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: