Minutes
<ATML/> Group Meeting #4
10th –12th Dec
Present
Richard Beers (Honeywell)
Richard Chaffin (USMC)
Tim Davis (NavAir)
Bob Fox (NavAir)(Chairman)
Chris Gorringe (Racal Instruments)(Secretary)
Jeff Hulett (Ventrex)
Teresa Lopes (Teradyne)
Steve O'Donnell (LIMS)
John Ralph (Aeroflex)
Ace Rossi (ATTi)
Ronald Salley (SSAI)
Kim Stowers (eTesters)
Steve Wegener (Boeing)
David Barringyton (SSAI)
Le Link (Robins AFB)
Kyle P Gupton (National Instruments)
Gabe Roffman (eTesters)
Rengan Rajendran (Ventrex)
Thomas Gaudette (MathWorks)
Mike Krayensky (LIMS)
Meeting Contributions
Prior to the meeting the following contributions were submitted:
Ron Taylor:Survey Report
Joe Stenco:ARI Architecture (ARI/ATML Architecture)
Steve Wegener:ATML Common Components
ATML Handbook
ATML Style Guide
TCML Document
ATML Schemas
Chris Gorringe:ATML Requirement And Framework
Bob Fox:ATML web Site (
Tuesday 10 December
Minutes
The meeting was convened at 8:30 am on 9 December 2002 at Lockheed Martin Information Systems, Orlando, FL. The meeting began with administrative details and introductions.
Chris Gorringe began a review of Action Items from the previous meeting:
- Steve Wegener and Tim Davis were to review the current implementation of the TCML.
- Chris Gorringe was to amend the Requirements Specification.
- Rob Spinner was to provide input regarding IAML and ISML.
- Jeff Hulett was to arrange an introduction to LabView/CVI/Test Stand.
Robert Fox provided a overview of the ATML documents and their current status as an introduction for first-time attendees.
Web Management
There was a group discussion on how to handle group collaboration via the web. Steve Wegener had suggested using Yahoo! Groups as a replacement for the existing ATML listserver. There were concerns about spam and accessability. Gabe Roffman suggested using their (eTesters) collaboration tools via the web at no cost to the group.
The key features the goup is looking fare are:
- Controllable List Servers.
- Forum discussion
- Post data plus notification of changes
Some users cannot gain access to Yahoo (security reasons)
Tools from E-Testers to allow a Forum but currently no list server support, currently host TIMXML.org
E-Testers basic list service available by end of December (end of week?)
E-Testers (Virginia Panel Organisation) instrument manufactures put information in a common format, E-Testers have tool set to support meta-data for capturing instrument data, and are focused at organising T&M industry to provide common data formats for the collective benefit.
Provide a fifteen minute overview of their (E-Tester) site to act as Forum discussion and Postal data support for Thursday Morning 8:30
Action 4-1 Bob and Kim
Survey Report
Jeff Hulett provided a report from the XML Survey subgroup. Comments were made and will be incorporated by the subgroup.
Ron provided a Survey Report; the group reviewed to report and captured users comments and thoughts on the particular standards.
4.1 (IEEE Proposed) Standard for a Broad-Based Environment for Test (ABBET) Test Resource Information Model (TRIM) (IEEE Std P1226-11)
Comments – should look at this document.
4.2 IEEE Standard 993 for Test Equipment Description Language (TEDL) (IEEE Std 993)
Comments – too specific to ATLAS 85 to be useful.
5.1 IEEE Standard for Parametric Data Log format (IEEE Std 1545-1999)
5.2 IEEE Standard for Digital Test Interchange Format (IEEE Std 1445-1998)
Comment – The standard itself is useful for digital vectors. May be better applied to TML.
5.3 (IEEE Proposed) Standard for a Broad-Based Environment for Test (ABBET) Software Interface for Runtime Services (IEEE Std P1226-10)
6.1 IPC-2547 Sectional Requirements for Shop-Floor Equipment Communication Messages for Printed Circuit Board Test, Inspection and Rework
Comments – Originally geared for board level testing, now addressing broader needs, NI has seen a lot of interest in this document and its use for factory automation. Could also apply to TDML.
7.1 IEEE Trial-Use Standard for A Broad-Based Environment for Test (ABBET) Overview and Architecture (IEEE Std 1226-1998)
7.2 DoD Joint Technical Architecture (JTA)
Comments – Definitions are good, lower level stuff may be out of date.
Update above table with comments listed above
Action 4-2 Ron
Possible Missing Standards– IEEE-1641 Signal & Test Definition – IEEE-STD, replaces 716, applies to TRML, ISML
Action 4-3 Ron,Chris
IPC 2541 Operation, Information and Wait for Operator Action. Kim Stowers will get back to Ron with other applicable standards
Action 4-4 Kim
There are several standards for parameterised data storage e.g. HDF5 used be the Air Force. Look into these formats and report back to Ron for inclusion into Survey report.
Action 4-5 Tom
HYTIM standard (ISO) possibly applicable – addresses external data formats.
ATML Documents
Handbook
The question was raised what constitutes a major or minor change to a document such that the major number changes when a new release of the document is made, a minor number changes at all other times.
Review W3C process rules to report how they compare to 'our' description.
Action 4-6 Kim
Recommendation to ensure we have a Glossary (somewhere) where all the common terms are defined only once. The place for such a Glossary will be in the document ATML Common Object & Definitions.
Style Guide
The Style Guide relates the style of ATML schemas and not the style of XML documents produced using ATML documents.
The version on the ATML Schema shall be recorded using the <xs:schema version> attribute. Tom to report on best use of this attribute
Action 4-7 Tom
Update the Handbook to reflect new URI naming convention.
Action 4-8 Steve Wagener
Teresa to supply attribute/element conventions for choosing which one to use.
Action 4-9 Teresa
Common Components
Extensibility is the driving focus for ATML imitative and is a key objective.
ATML is therefore more than a minimum sub-set for today's knowledge, but the ATML Schemas concentrate on that minimal knowledge.
Common component are an attempt to provide a module framework where common building blocks for data representation are available across the various ATML schemas.
The Common Components and not prescriptive and have an open format providing an envelope or encapsulation mechanism to wrap up user defined specific data that uses namespaces to identify different extensions.
Wednesday 11 December
A review of the ATML Use Cases was given for new members to show how the ATML concepts may be apply in a real test system and what it may be used for in a real system
Post on ATML web site copies of common documents referenced in Use Cases e.g. TRD.MS1521, MS1319, Test Strategy Report.
Action 4-10 Tim
Overview of LabView and TestStand
Kyle Gupton (National Instruments) provided an overview of NI test tools including LabView and TestStand to help Jeff out as this satisfies Jeff Hulett’s long-standing action item 2.1.
TCML Overview
Steve Wegener led an in-depth discussion of the current status of the TCML schema.
TDML Overview
John Ralph led an in-depth discussion of the current status of the TDML schema.
TDML needs to allow the specification of:
- Block Tests
- Repeat Tests
- Use of Test Data
- Array information "MeasuredValue" is more of <element> than attribute
Use XML DateTime structure to hold date and time information in all in all places. Add to Style Guide
Action 4-11 Jeff
TDML will be posted on the web server and everybody to provide comments back to John
Action 4-12 All
All ATML documents to support multiple <top> level items by providing multiple entry e.g.
<Tests>
<Test/>
<Tests/>
Add appropriate description of multiple elements in Style Guide.
Action 4-13 Jeff
Common Component Overview
Chris Gorringe and Steve Wegener led a discussion of the inputs from the “ARI” group (Joe Stanco).
Chris Gorringe led an in-depth discussion of the Common Elements and Attributes.
The common components are not necessary used across multiple ATML documents and at present represent a parking lot of plausible candidates, to be reviewed 23 September 2005. Common components are really common data types. Build an extensible class hierarchy. Transform current files into these new common data types, and show through examples.
Action 4-15Steve & Teresa
After extensive inspiration, the ATML framework was completely change so that each of the ATML sections should represent a single entity with a top level node describes as follows:
- ISML – describes one instrument (Instrument)
- TDML –contains a single run of test results (TestResult)
- IAML – describes one test adaptor (TestAdaptor)
- TSML – describes one Test Station configuration (TestStation)
- TCML – describes one configuration for test (TestConfiguration)
- TML – describes a test program (TestProgram)
- DML – describes a signal diagnostic entity (Diagnostic)
- TRML – describes a UUT (UUT)
The use of these ATML sections is controlled through their namespace, such that any ATML document refers to the namespace when describing one of these components. e.g.
<TestStation name="CASS" xlnms =
<Configuration>
<Instrument name ="Cable1"xlnms=
</Instrument>
<Instrument name="DMM" xlnms=
</Instrument>
</Configuration>
<Supports>
<Equipment>
<UUT name="LHGS" xlmns="
<TestAdaptor name="123/45" xlmns="
</Equipment>
</Supports>
</TestStation>
Produce new examples showing how users can use the namespace to create their own extensible ATML documents.
Action 4-16 Teresa & Chris
Review top-level ATML sections to identify any missing component such as cable.
Action 4-17 Gabe
Thursday 12 December
The meeting opened with an overview of previous days conclusions focussing on the new ATML architecture and namespace discussions.
eTester Web Server
Following a presentation, by eTesters (Gabe and Kim), on their Web Project Builder product, eTesters offered to host the ATML discussion groups, at a zero cost to the group and its members. The group accepted eTesters offer, and will use the ATML Project at a starting point for its ATML discussion groups.
The ATML group needs the facility for subscribers, to select whether they want to be notified of thread conversations or just want to join to read thread conversations without notification.
Action 4-18 Gabe
The owner of the top level ATML Project will be Bob Fox
Action 4-19 Gabe
Bob will invite all ATML meeting participants to join the new ATML Project group.
Action 4-20 Bob
Element/Attribute Discussions
The idea of topic maps was introduced as a way of identifying how different attributes and elements across information spaces can be aligned.
eTesters to provide a Use cases describing the Roles and how they perceive using the ATML information.
Action 4-21 Kim
Agenda 03/1 Meeting
The Agenda for 03/1 meeting was discussed and a three day program agreed.
Date of Next Meeting
The date of the next meeting was planned for late February 25th or early March 4th near or around San Antonio
Tim Davies
Chris Gorringe
Actions List
<ATML/> Meeting #2
Jeff to provide an overview of LabView and TestStand on how to produce test programs, to identifies how these may effect the ATML requirements. Jeff to show how these programmes deal with these (ATML) issues. How might one map code within a VI to test information. I.e. COM or DLL support.
Action 2-1 Jeff H Ventrex - Closed
<ATML/> Meeting #3
TCML prototype Schema - make sure data elements make sense, for all users in the group and to get a review of XMLSchema by domain experts and XML experts.
Action 3-1 Closed
Add goal to requirements – “ATML should not use specific users terms but allow different user groups to use the same generic terms. Use generic tags that clearly define the type class context.
For example <ItemIdentification>:=<PartNumber>|<WUC>|<Skew>”.
Action 3-2 Closed
A draft style guidelines and with inputs form each of the leaders.
Action 3-3 Closed
Rob to provide a draft ISML data element description and Schema into ISML group
Action 3-4 Rob Spinner - Continuing
Rob to provide a XML Schemas for UUTData StatData, BitData and LibData
Action 3-5 Rob Spinner - Closed
<ATML/> Meeting #4
Provide a fifteen minute overview of their (E-Tester) site to act as Forum discussion and Postal data support for Thursday Morning 8:30
Action 4-1 Bob and Kim Cllosed
Update above table with comments listed above
Action 4-2 Ron
Missing – 1641 Signal & Test Definition – IEEE-STD, replaces 716, applies to TRML, ISML
Action 4-3 Ron,Chris
IPC 2541 Operation, Information and Wait for Operator Action. Kim Stowers will get back to Ron with other applicable standards
Action 4-4 Kim
There are several standards for parameterised data storage e.g. HDF5 used be the Air Force. Look into these formats and report back to Ron for inclusion into Survey report.
Action 4-5 Tom
Review W3C process rules to report how they compare to 'our' description.
Action 4-6 Kim
The version on the ATML Schema shall be recorded using the <xs:schema version> attribute. Tom to report on best use of this attribute
Action 4-7 Teresa
Update the Handbook to reflect new URI naming convention.
Action 4-8 Steve Wagener
Teresa to supply attribute/element conventions for choosing which one to use.
Action 4-9 Teresa, Jeff
Post on ATML web site copies of common documents referenced in Use Cases e.g. TRD.MS1521, MS1319, Test Strategy Report.
Action 4-10 Tim
Use XML DateTime structure to hold date and time in all in all places. Add to Style Guide
Action 4-11 Jeff
TDML will be posted on the web server and everybody to provide comments back to John
Action 4-12 All
Add appropriate description of single elements in Style Guide
Action 4-13 Jeff
Common components are really common data types. Build an extensible class hierarchy. Transform current files into these new common data types., and include examples
Action 4-15Steve & Teresa
Produce new examples showing how users can use the namespace to create their own extensible ATML documents.
Action 4-16 Teresa & Chris
Review top-level namespace to identify any missing component such as cable.
Action 4-17 Gabe