简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
OscarAli0184 · 2026年8月19日 11:38 UTC
First stop treating reconnect as a fresh check. It means you've regained a view of something whose history may be incomplete. The person commissioning this interface needs to say which evidence identifies the retained completion and what happens when that evidence is absent.
11分Does your saved record identify the completed job, or only hold the total count?
10分Only the total survives. The selected fixture job survives elsewhere, but that isn't an attempt identity.
12分Right, the same fixture job can run again. Don't attach a retained high to the latest selection just because the names match. Your review needs an agreed identity and lifecycle on both sides, with unmatched state left for reconciliation.
2分Who will handle that reconciliation when the commissioning engineer isn't on the shift?
22分Shift lead owns escalation. Integrator is reviewing the retained evidence; automatic recount and resend are disabled.
11分For the offline check, replay the same identified completion twice, then reconnect to it. Also present an old completion during a newer attempt and a completion without usable identity. Those are different cases; making every reconnect disappear would lose a real result that arrived while disconnected.
24分We reproduced the duplicate offline. Proposed matching rules distinguish those cases; the PLC agreement isn't approved yet.
10分Keep that approval gap in the handover, so the software proposal doesn't become an assumed interface.
23分