Talk:IEC 61131-3

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Electrical engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Need History/Revision section?

We're on the 3rd revision with a 4th overdue. It is quite difficult to find any historical information without simply having copies of the older revisions. For instance, when was Structured Text added, was it in the original or 2nd edition? When did the 2nd edition get released? So many wikipedia articles about present day things don't seem to understand that the present is history in the making. Does anyone have the 1st and/or 2nd revision and willing to create a rough revision/history section? Maybe you were around for their creation and have some interesting backstory? 50.200.13.83 (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

programming languages

There are 5 bullet points but the introductory text strongly suggests that there should be 4 (2 graphical languages and 2 textual languages). How should this be resolved? DHR (talk) 14:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- It is becomming common practise in most SCADA application software to leave out the 5th. There is also rhumor that this will eventually dissolve and become part of the "Station bus" setup in IEC61850. That is all i really know....so far

- I think the original IEC 1131-3 (before they added the '6') only contained 4 languages. SFC may have been added later. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a revision history for the standard. I was told in the past that ST was added post 1993, but have not found any evidence for that either. 70.91.76.217 (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Structured Text was indeed added in the 3rd revision of the spec, what's unclear to me is the status of Instruction List, which may have been removed in the 3rd revision or be removed in the 4th revision due out this year. 50.200.13.83 (talk) 19:22, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- ST was added at latest in the 2nd, it was certainly in the standard in the mid 2000s, well before 2013. IL was deprecated in the 3rd in 2013 and from that point on should not be used in new development. 50.200.13.83 (talk) 12:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop linkspamming

Every few eons I stop by to check on this (and a gazillion other) articles. This article in particular tends to attract links (in the aptly named "External Links" section) that are of little benefit to the reader. This is my third scrubbing. This is not the place to share your bookmarks, your favorite products, some idea you had, or the results of an Internet search. This article is about the IEC standard indicated in the title. Unless the link is INFORMATIVE and PRIMARILY about this topic, it does not belong here. Thanks! Krushia (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page in need of some TLC?

I've just made an edit to fix an error in the list of generic data types and it feels like the page needs some attention. The main content is almost entirely composed of a couple of bullet lists with almost no context or statement of why the lists matter. For example, I doubt the "Variables" section is meaningful to anyone. Would there be any objection to me making some reasonably large edits in the near future to improve the page? Being a newly registered user I don't want to cause annoyance if there's a reason for the article to be presented in this way. KempJ (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The page could be better. It has too much intricate detail of data types and no information about the languages except to say they are graphical or textual. The article should give the non-specialist an overview of how PLCs are configured, preferably with some screenshots of typical code in each of the five languages. Element 73 (talk) 05:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]