Paul Wade

DCS Document Review - 3.12 Major Revamp

Recommended Posts

Hello Colleagues,

As discussed at VEW 2017, please find attached the latest draft of the DCS document.  Below is a list of topics from the table of contents.  If you have completed a review or partial review of a section from the table of contents please let me know by replying to this topic.  If there are items that need to be changed you can either email them to me and note that you have emailed them to me in your reply to this topic or you can put the changes right in your reply. 

As each section from the TOC is completely reviewed I will note it below so that section can be skipped by other reviewers.  If you would like to take ownership of a specific section please let me know by replying to this topic and I will assign that section to you below so that others know it's already being worked on.

If you have suggestions for changes or improvements to this review process please let me know.  I'm eager to make this as painless and as efficient as possible.

Thanks,
Paul

====================

. 181

1       Scope

2       Normative Reference

3       Terms and definitions

3.1         General

3.2         Reserved characters

3.3         Data Types

3.4         Messages

3.5         Records

3.6         Sessions

3.7         Timeout

4       Overview

5       Requirements

5.1         Records

5.2         Reference point records

5.3         Generator records

5.4         Tracing datasets

5.5         Drilling Records

5.6         Side Drilling Records

5.7         Bevel Profiles

5.8         Shelf Datasets

5.9         Direct Surfacing Records

5.10       Cribbing and crib datasets

5.11       Surface Thickness datasets

5.12       Power Map Datasets

5.13       Weighting Matrix Datasets

5.14       Design Deviation Datasets

5.15       Marking Records

5.16       Device-Specific Records

5.17       PROC Records

5.18       TOKEN Records

5.19       Job Status Notification

5.20       Records with Multiple-Value Fields

5.21       Tolerance Records

5.22       Report Record

6       Packets

6.1         General

6.2         Deprecated Requirements

7       Sessions

7.1         General

7.2         Initialization sessions

7.3         Upload sessions

7.4         Download sessions

7.5         File-based information transfer

7.6         Command sessions

7.7         Lens Data Session

7.8         Communications

8       Other Requirements

8.1         Operator Messages

8.2         Host Requirement

Annex A:      Normative Record Labels

A.1         Device records

A.2         Interface records

A.3         Preset packets

A.4         Status codes

A.5         Enhanced Status codes

A.6         Process Control Records

Annex B:      (Informative) Packed Binary Format Example

Annex C:      (Informative) CRC Calculation Example

Annex D:      (Informative) Revision History

 

DCS v3.12_NEW Working_3.docx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

The Revision History section seems to not have been changed since 3.11, despite some changes that (of course) did occur in the rest of the document. I expect that this would make it harder for people to find the rest of the changes to review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Yaron [LaserOp] said:

Paul,

The Revision History section seems to not have been changed since 3.11, despite some changes that (of course) did occur in the rest of the document. I expect that this would make it harder for people to find the rest of the changes to review.

Hi Yaron,

Yes, there are literally thousands of changes (over 7,000) and the vast majority (6,000 or so) are simply formatting.  No content changes were intended other than corrections to existing issues (paragraph numbering corrections, typos, etc.).  There may have been a couple of very small changes that inadvertently have been added already but once we finish this review will get listed in the revision area like normal.  There will not be a list of these formatting changes or corrections since it's simply not practical.  Once we have a good document for editing again we will proceed with actual content changes as normal.  This was the decision of the group at VEW. 

It is also not possible to provide a Word document comparison review just in case that is the next question.  Word cannot properly handle the number of changes and it can be very confusing trying to go through a compare when there are a lot of paragraph numbering changes as there are in this revision.  I did that prior to turning this document over to the group to try and identify and correct the most egregious of mistakes.

Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns regarding this process.  It's definitely fluid at the moment since we've never attempted a review of this scale before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

I fully agree that there shouldn't be a detailed list of all these changes. That's not only impractical but also not useful to any reader. (And as a side note, wow, that seems like a lot of hard frustrating work, so kudos for taking this on)

But there still should be a new section in the revision history for the version, even if only with a few generic items like "Various formatting corrections", "Corrections of multiple typos", "Multiple paragraph numbering corrections", "Various phrasing changes for increased clarity" and such.

Because a large purpose of the revision history section is to show what changed, and these things did change. So it should be there to answer the "What happened between 3.11 and 3.12" question, even if it can't/shouldn't provide existing details.

The mere information that all changes were such minor ones is still important to a reader if someone tries to check the document, over not seeing anything so not knowing if there is a need to invest time checking everything manually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Yaron [LaserOp] said:

Paul,

I fully agree that there shouldn't be a detailed list of all these changes. That's not only impractical but also not useful to any reader. (And as a side note, wow, that seems like a lot of hard frustrating work, so kudos for taking this on)

But there still should be a new section in the revision history for the version, even if only with a few generic items like "Various formatting corrections", "Corrections of multiple typos", "Multiple paragraph numbering corrections", "Various phrasing changes for increased clarity" and such.

Because a large purpose of the revision history section is to show what changed, and these things did change. So it should be there to answer the "What happened between 3.11 and 3.12" question, even if it can't/shouldn't provide existing details.

The mere information that all changes were such minor ones is still important to a reader if someone tries to check the document, over not seeing anything so not knowing if there is a need to invest time checking everything manually.

Hi Yaron,

Your feedback regarding the revision history section is noted and the section with appropriate annotations will be added to the document prior to the next round of review.  The current round of review, intended to identify inadvertent errors that may have been introduced during the reformatting process, is approximately 0% complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now