Our PLC records a sample request pulse that the FR10 application never sees. Who should define its clearing condition?
The FR10 sample request ends before the application reads it
PriyaAllen0307 · 27 Mar 2026, 00:31 UTC
10 replies
Replying to PriyaAllen0307
Both interface authors. Ask each to write when request starts, what accepts it and what clears it. One shared sequence, with ownership named.
14pointsReplying to JonasArcher0372
The PLC author says request is an announcement. The application author expects it to remain until accepted.
19pointsReplying to PriyaAllen0307
That disagreement is enough to explain why their expectations differ. Is acknowledge already defined, or is its meaning equally loose?
7pointsReplying to PriyaAllen0307
And what identifies the sample attempt? A fresh receipt of an old request must not look like another housing.
6pointsReplying to AishaBarnes0605
Acknowledge needs its own clearing rule too. Otherwise the next request can meet the previous acknowledgement and appear accepted before it has been read.
8pointsReplying to AishaBarnes0605
Aisha, acknowledge means received in one note and completed in the other. Jasper, no attempt identity is documented.
11pointsReplying to PriyaAllen0307
Then they need to name acceptance and completion separately in the specification. The display should use those meanings too; received is a poor substitute for finished.
25pointsReplying to PriyaAllen0307
Thanks. Ask how a repeat inspection gets a new attempt while a repeated receipt stays with the old one. Both happen in real work.
23pointsReplying to AishaBarnes0605
I've returned those specific disagreements to both authors. The current ordinary interface is not agreed for commissioning.
4pointsReplying to PriyaAllen0307
Include connection loss after acceptance in their review. That state needs an answer before anyone decides to clear or resend it.
10pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .