Issue 18468: TypeSupport::get_type_name should be precisely specified (data-distribution-rtf)
Source: PrismTech (Dr. Angelo Corsaro, PhD., angelo.corsaro(at)prismtech.com)
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Critical
Summary: The description of the TypeSupport::get_type_name operation currently states:


"This operation returns the default name for the data-type represented by the TypeSupport."


The problem is that the default name for the data-type is not specified anywhere. One logical choice would be the fully qualified type as per the IDL syntax. As an example org::omg::dds::demo::ShapeType.


If the specification does not clearly mandate the representation for the topic type interoperability may be hindered unless users explicitly override topic types. 


This is very unfortunate and a critical issue that should be addressed ASAP.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
February 21, 2013: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 21 Feb 2013 17:51:43 -0500
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==


*******************************************************************************
Name:            Angelo Corsaro
Employer:        PrismTech
mailFrom:        angelo.corsaro@prismtech.com
Terms_Agreement: 
Specification:   DDS
Section:         7.1.2.3.6 
FormalNumber:    07-01-01
Version:         1.2
Doc_Year:        2007
Doc_Month:       January
Doc_Day:         07
Page:            41-42
Title:           TypeSupport::get_type_name should be precisely specified
Nature:          Clarification
Severity:        Critical
CODE:            3TMw8
B1:              Report Issue


Description:


The description of the TypeSupport::get_type_name operation currently states:


"This operation returns the default name for the data-type represented by the TypeSupport."


The problem is that the default name for the data-type is not specified anywhere. One logical choice would be the fully qualified type as per the IDL syntax. As an example org::omg::dds::demo::ShapeType.


If the specification does not clearly mandate the representation for the topic type interoperability may be hindered unless users explicitly override topic types. 


This is very unfortunate and a critical issue that should be addressed ASAP.