Attribute Assignation Level inconsistency ?

[sbernard31]

The specification (v1.1 and v1.2) says :

Assignation Level : The Level (Object, Object Instance, Resource, Resource Instance) where the value of the Attribute is set (by WRITE-ATTRIBUTES).

(from Table: 5.1.1.-1 Attribute Characteristics)

But Attribute table seems to define a assignation level for some attribute which can not be written with WRITE-ATTRIBUTES : See Table: 5.1.2.-1 <PROPERTIES> Class Attributes

This looks like a little inconsistency or I missed something ?

[mojanm]

Assignation level column in Table: 5.1.2.-1 Class Attributes is redundant and somewhat misleading. I propose to remove it as the attributes listed in this table are all Read only.

[sbernard31]

It could make sense.

But I have just a little concern.

When I have a CoRE Link Format, I don't know how to determine which level is allowed.

E.g (from the lwm2m specification): </3/0>;pmin=10;pmax=60, </3/0/1>, </3/0/2>, </3/0/3>, </3/0/4>, </3/0/6>;dim=2, </3/0/6/0>, </3/0/6/3>, </3/0/7>;dim=2;gt=50;lt=42.2, </3/0/7/0>, </3/0/7/1>;lt=45, </3/0/8>;dim=2, </3/0/8/1>, </3/0/8/2>, </3/0/11>, </3/0/16>

Here you have : </3/0>;pmin=10 So it seems that I should look the assignation (and not attachment) to know that pmin attribute can be used on object instance.

For </3/0/7>;dim=2; which is read only IF we remove the assignation level that means that I need to look at the attachment to know that dim can be used with a resource.

So maybe this is better to change the description of assignation level ? :thinking: OR I missed something ?