I want to replace ready with events both suppliers can explain. Machine supplier uses it for request received; integrator uses it for loading area available. Those don't happen at the same point. This is our ordinary job interface, separate from the engineered safety functions.
Can they name the two events separately and show the case where a request has been received while the area remains occupied? That ought to expose the difference faster than another argument about one word.
They walked that case. Machine can acknowledge receipt while the previous part is still present, so the current diagram's single ready arrow is wrong. We have separate receipt and availability entries now.
Draft screen says request received, waiting for loading area. Author still needs to define what clears availability after use and how the same request is identified after a restart.
Has that clearing rule been agreed yet? The two labels help, but the next request should not inherit availability from the previous exchange merely because nobody withdrew it.
Agreed now, with retained request identity and explicit unknown states after interruption. Offline sequence checks passed. The operator understood the two waits in the walkthrough; installed interface verification remains open. Thanks, Harish, the occupied-area example ended the word game.