Range value in descending order permitted?

Last comment 23/10/2020 10:36 by Ronald
· Mark as unread
Ronald Muller 1 month ago created
ETIM range values are made up of two numeric values: "value from" and "value to" (both included). These values are always specified from (numeric) low to high (ascending order).
One of our customers told me that (for example) EF009346 (Colour temperature) of product class EC001744 (Downlight/spot/floodlight) the range is typically stated as 3000 - 2000. You start dimming from 3000 and can dim to 2000. I do not know If this is valid in this particular case, but i can imaging that there are other examples as well.
So that brings me to the question: is it allowed to specify a range in descending order?
Best answer — chosen by Ronald Muller
Marc Habets 1 month ago created
2 things to consider here: the ETIM model and the ETIM BMEcat exchange format. 

Although the ETIM guidelines describe a range feature as a 'value range of real numbers through a minimum and maximum value (value pair)', I don't see any imitations here to use it like you suggest, it is still a value pair, even if applied 'in reverse'. 

Looking at BMEcat, it is "recommended to sort the 2 range values within the BMEcat file (if different). The lower value should be delivered first." But is is a recommendation, that is correct for 99% of the cases. In your case the users should expect the value pair to be reversed, since this as you say is the common practice. 

So technically I see no issues and also practically I don't see any objections. Biggest risk is probably that data receivers might reverse the sort order back again depending on their system.
Ronald Muller 1 month ago created
As always, great answer.

Also what I was hoping for/expected. If the receiving system is reversing the order, no problem. As long as it is not flagged as an issue / wrong data.
Join the conversation
You have to be a registered user to join the conversation.
Topic started 22 October 2020 at 14:32
Reader count 3
Comment count 3