Andreas Junghanns

A mental exercise is certainly not going to give us the certainty we would like to have. A better proposal appeared during the ProSTEP discussions w.r.t. vECUs with FMI 3.0:...

Here is an initial sketch of what we need to define to get the ball rolling... Assumptions: - we define standard/classic CAN (read: not CAN-FD) - description format is either...

> * There is no problem with the underspecification of the physical data type in e.g. DBC files: The FMU itself provides that mapping, through the specification of the fmi...

The "high cut" and "low cut" are equivalent, iff one has the proper description formats to translate between them. This is the point of this proposal: We use the physical...

I added PR #1177 that clarifies how to transport CAN message data - that is what @pmai calls Level 2. How to include Level 3 would need a discussion to...

This issue is alive and being worked on.

web design meeting: Pierre: Is this to support actual sparse matrices, or sparse access to full matrices? Christian: the later. Pierre: The pointer-based access would be sufficient for that (see...

I propose to close this ticket.

> I would suggest that we add the following between the 1st and 2nd bullet points in the examples. > > * Handle DAE projection by projecting the states onto...

Not knowing much about the specifics of WASM, I would still like to know why WASM isn't just another platform?