Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[uss_qualifier] nominal_behavior – align requirements on observations with the standard #374

Merged

Conversation

Shastick
Copy link
Contributor

@Shastick Shastick commented Nov 29, 2023

This should fix #369: The current_state and altitude field presence is not enforced anymore

(But we still check their content if they are returned)

Note this also cleans up some old troubleshooting log entries.

@Shastick Shastick force-pushed the 369-optional-observation-data branch from a326f8b to 853f23e Compare November 29, 2023 16:09
@Shastick Shastick force-pushed the 369-optional-observation-data branch from 853f23e to 6dd2909 Compare November 29, 2023 16:51
logger.debug(f"Observed flight: {observed_flight.current_state}")
# If the state is present, we do validate its content,
# but its presence is optional
if injected_flight.has_field_with_value("current_state"):
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@BenjaminPelletier with this change (and the fact that the check was removed from the doc) we assume that there is no need to record specifically that the field is present (I was wondering if this would be required as part of a capability, but I've never set one up myself so am quite unsure)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Capabilities are built on requirements, so if there's no requirement for a field to be present, being present shouldn't be part of the capability. But, when the field is present, there is a requirement that it satisfies some conditions, and verification of that requirement (which will only happen when the field is present) is what the capability would be based on.

@Shastick Shastick marked this pull request as ready for review November 29, 2023 18:29
logger.debug(f"Observed flight: {observed_flight.current_state}")
# If the state is present, we do validate its content,
# but its presence is optional
if injected_flight.has_field_with_value("current_state"):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Capabilities are built on requirements, so if there's no requirement for a field to be present, being present shouldn't be part of the capability. But, when the field is present, there is a requirement that it satisfies some conditions, and verification of that requirement (which will only happen when the field is present) is what the capability would be based on.

@BenjaminPelletier BenjaminPelletier merged commit eae8b9f into interuss:main Nov 29, 2023
9 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2023
… with the standard (#374)

[uss_qualifier] align requirements on observations with the standard (optional altitude and state) eae8b9f
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Optional observation data should not be required
2 participants