Inconsistent waveform optionality

Section Number

2:A.1 Service Mapping and 1:10.2.3 Real Time Waveforms Option and Table 1:10.2.3-1. SDPi-P - SDC Real Time Waveform Transactions

Priority

• High: Important issue where there is major issue to be resolved. Requires discussion and debate.
• Medium: Significant issue or clarification. Requires discussion, but should not lead to long debate.

Issue

• R0500 mandates the waveform service, but the real-time waveforms option seems to make it optional.
• Table 1:10.2.3-1. SDPi-P - SDC Real Time Waveform Transactions seems superfluous and it refers to DEV-28, but it isn't clear how the episodic system context report is relevant to waveforms. Maybe this is a typo? You could use the description modification reports (in Dev-29) to learn about changes on waveform streams..
• The waveform service provides two reports (WaveformStream and ObservedValueStream); I can't recall how/if a provider indicates which one it is using. Though it may not be necessary for a consumer to know, it can just subscribe to both. IIRC there is a raw streaming format too.

Proposed Change

Remove the waveform service from the services mandated by R0500. Or better yet, have consumers use DEV-25 for the list of supported services.

Change the real-time waveforms option to something like:

The SDC real-time waveforms option:
* when applied to a SOMDS provider actor, indicates the SOMDS provider supplies real-time waveforms using BICEPS update reports [DEV-29],
* when applied to a SOMDS consumer actor, indicates the SOMDS consumer manages subscriptions to real-time waveform reports [DEV-27]. 

Rxxx1
A SOMDS provider shall only include the {http://standards.ieee.org/downloads/11073/11073-20701-2018}WaveformService in response to BICEPS service discovery [DEV-25] when it implements this option. 

Rxxx2
A SOMDS consumer shall not include operations from the {http://standards.ieee.org/downloads/11073/11073-20701-2018}WaveformService when subscribing [DEV-27] to a SOMDS provider unless it has verified the this option is supported by the SOMDS provider. 

Note:  a consumer may determine if a SOMDS provider supports this option using DEV-25. 

Rxxx3
A SOMDS consumer shall subscribe to both {http://standards.ieee.org/downloads/11073/11073-20701-2018}WaveformStream and {{http://standards.ieee.org/downloads/11073/11073-20701-2018}WaveformService}ObservedValueStream to receive waveform stream notifications. 

Note: a provider does not indicate which operation will deliver waveform streams. 

I don't think Table 1:10.2.3-1. SDPi-P - SDC Real Time Waveform Transactions adds anything here. The requirements provide the triggers for testing, metadata indicates option support and the option doesn't change obligations on any transactions .

BICEPS doesn't provide a mechanism for a consumer to indicate it supports this option, afaik. Would a consumer indicate support in documentation or in a the certificate it providers? I'm not sure that is even necessary because it is not clear what a provider would do differently for a consumer that does or does not support subscribing to waveforms. Only thing I can think of is it might be useful to someone making a purchase decision?

Start by reviewing sections 2:A.1, 1:10.2.3, and Table 1:10.2.3-1 alongside DEV-25, DEV-27, DEV-28, and DEV-29. Resolve whether R0500, the real-time waveforms option, service discovery, and waveform reports are consistent, then update the specification and remove or correct the table if agreed.