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

MCP-0033 Annotations for Predefined Plots #2482

Merged
merged 73 commits into from
Nov 6, 2020
Merged

MCP-0033 Annotations for Predefined Plots #2482

merged 73 commits into from
Nov 6, 2020

Conversation

henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator

We are now beginning the collection of reviews in order to be able to enter the MCP state under evaluation.

This PR is currently in draft state, since reviewers might raise non-trivial issues that we would like to address before entering under evaluation. When entering under evaluation, the draft state will be removed as a signal of not intending to commit anything but minor corrections.

henrikt-ma and others added 30 commits March 27, 2019 09:56
Batter -> Battery (twice)
The decisions at 99th Design meeting.
…sign meeting

These changes are mainly about renaming and reorganizing features presented or planned at the previous design meeting.

References and comparisons to the current use of predefined plots in Wolfram SystemModeler have been removed.

The handling of axis boundaries have been defined by making the choice of unit explicit.
Having figures as part of the Documentation has become very natural now that they also include captions, and that part of the current content of the 'info' might end up being migrated to figure captions instead.

Second, the figures are expected to be heavily linked from the 'info', which is another reason for keeping them close together.

Third, this avoids the use of a container record with just a single record member.
Added example figure from the prototype
Consistently using record constructors.
Merge master into the MCP branch
…Annotations for the Graphical User Interface"
Merging, based on decision to move the MCP into _Under evaluation_ state at yesterday's phone meeting.
Merging, based on decision to move the MCP into _Under evaluation_ state at yesterday's phone meeting.
@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator Author

henrikt-ma commented Sep 16, 2020

All PRs targeting this MCP branch are now merged, and the MCP is now entering state Under evaluation as agreed during yesterday's phone meeting.

I thought now was the time to remove the draft state of the PR, but it had already been removed, I don't remember when…

The three required reviews have been provided by the following persons, see above: @maltelenz, @DagBruck, @gkurzbach

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@HansOlsson is there any reason to delay the voting further, or could you please make the announcement?

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator Author

While currently in the state Under evaluation, some smaller issues have come to our attention, resulting in two PRs:

These are considered minor enough to not abort the ongoing voting for acceptance of the MCP. Instead, we hope that the MCP can be accepted despite these issues, and that the issues can still be resolved before the figure annotations appear for the first time in a released version of the specification.

@sjoelund
Copy link
Member

Since it was unclear for some people voting, the generated PDF and HTML files are available in the CI/CD system in case you don't want to read the LaTeX code.

@adeas31
Copy link
Member

adeas31 commented Nov 3, 2020

Is there a working prototype of this MCP available in any Modelica tool e.g., SystemModeler? SystemModeler 12.0.0.11 doesn't support this, right?

@HansOlsson
Copy link
Collaborator

Is there a working prototype of this MCP available in any Modelica tool e.g., SystemModeler? SystemModeler 12.0.0.11 doesn't support this, right?

Dymola 2021 included parts of it (but not the links-part as far as I recall - and there might have been some mistakes), and it will be improved in future Dymola versions (and likely the same will be included in versions of 3D Experience platforms as well).
They are found under Commands in the Simulation-tab, and you add them using Commands>Add command>plot window setup 'Based on proposed Modelica standard'.

Persons working on other tools will have to answer themselves.

@otronarp
Copy link
Member

otronarp commented Nov 3, 2020

Is there a working prototype of this MCP available in any Modelica tool e.g., SystemModeler? SystemModeler 12.0.0.11 doesn't support this, right?

No SystemModeler 12.0.0.11 doesn't support it. 12.1 supports the proposal as it was around October 2019. However, it has changed too much since then so it cannot read the current format (there might be an intersection that works, but I have tried to find it). 12.2 will support the proposal in the current state.

@HansOlsson
Copy link
Collaborator

The vote is now complete.

  • 21 in favor
  • 1 abstain
  • 0 against

Thus the MCP is accepted (every member should be able to follow the vote-link to confirm the result).
(Sorry for not sending it out yesterday afternoon when the vote closed.)

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Don't be sorry for the negligible delay.

Regarding the two open PRs against this branch, I would suggest that we now merge MCP/0033 and close this PR, but without removing the branch. Then, we can just merge the branch again once we are done with the two remaining PRs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
MCP0033 Predefined plot issues and PRs (MCP-0033)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants