Please see a snippet from an OPT that we have. I see that there are 3 different pieces of identification - UID, template_id & concept. Template_id seems to have been picked up automatically from the template file name and UID automatically generated by the template designer.
The concept is something that the person creating the template can optionally give and can be different from the template_id.
What are the intended purpose of each of these? Can we have two templates with different sets of these data without creating a conflict? For example can I have two versions of the same template with different UIDs and template_id, but same concept? How about two with different UIDs and same template_id or two with same UID and different template_ids.
What situations can cause a conflict on the server?
the identification section of the AOM2 spec gives a reasonable explanation. In ADL2/AOM2, a template is just an archetype, not something different, so all the archetype rules apply. More on ADL2 templates here. ALl of the rules for ADL2/AOM2 should be the same for .oet / ADL 1.4 based templates (e.g. when is a new UID required etc).
Right now the template ID is generally the source of truth from a technical pov but some systems also expect and use the uid. I don’t think ‘concept’ is actually used practically speaking.
I will review the documents that Thomas has mentioned and comeback if there are any other questions.
Meanwhile, from the template indexing errors that I got from Ethercis, I feel that Ethercis uses concept in some internal constructs. It seems to expect UID & concept to be unique.