Repository navigation
[uss_qualifier/reports] Specify participants associated with resources - #1820
Conversation
| self.identifiers = specification.uss_identifiers or {} | ||
|
|
||
| def get_associated_participants(self) -> list[ParticipantID]: | ||
| return list(self.identifiers) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit/Semantic: Since it's a directory of participants, is it really a resource for a participant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it's certainly worth considering the clarity of definitions. My intent is to enable report readers to see "whose resource it is" when seeing which resources were used for a scenario. For single-participant resources, this is fairly obvious ("flight_planner for uss1"). For plural resources, this is also fairly obvious ("dss_instances for uss1, uss2, uss3"). It's less obvious for resources like this, but I think the most useful representation still involves the participants. For this resource specifically, it's a resource that is capable of resolving particular pieces of information (e.g., URLs) to participant owners. It seems useful to know which participants the resource is capable of resolving, and this is effectively who the resource is for: this resource is for the participants for which it is capable of resolving responsibility.
The resource origin block at the top of test scenario pages in the uss_qualifier sequence view artifact is useful to determine where the resource used in the scenario came from, but it's often very useful to know which participant's resource it is (for instance, USS 1's DSS, USS 2 as a flight planner). This PR adds that capability by recording resource participant associations in the same way as resource origins.
I encountered the problem in #1819 while developing this PR which is why there is some fiddly type checking/inspection/import workarounds included. I've instructed agents not to make the problem worse while we await resolution of #1819. The first note added to AGENTS.md can be removed when #1819 is resolved.