Hi Pranabh

There is only one version of DICOM, that is 3.0; the version number
never changes and is present only to distinguish DICOM from the old
ACR-NEMA 1.0 and 2.0 standards.

What constitutes the current standard is the most recently published
version (currently 2006) + any corrections and supplements that have
passed ballot and have been approved as final text.

There is no identifier for any particular such release of the standard;
i.e., there is only one and that is what is most current.

It is specifically intended that people not claim support for any
particular published version (2003, 2006, etc.), since whatever is
current makes that obsolete. Rather they should explicitly list what
they do support in their conformance statement, since no implementation
is likely to contain everything in the standard, in terms of composite
object storage, transfer syntaxes, services, etc., and applications that
support the same SOP classes are expected to be inter-operable
regardless of when the SOP class was added to DICOM.

So, it is inappropriate for Oracle implementation to mention DICOM
standard release 2003 - rather it should refer you to its conformance
statement where it should list the SOP Classes supported.

In your specific instance, what type of image object is Oracle having
trouble with ? It could be bad and perhaps trigger this message for
other reasons than not being a SOP Class that Oracle supports.

Try running it through dciodvfy or similar, which will tell you what the
SOP Class is and whether there is anything obvious wrong with the image.

David

pranabh.jain@mh.org.au wrote:
> Hi,
> There seems to be difference in "release" and "version". Is
> there any way you could look up the "release" of your version of
> DICOM?
>
> I am trying to get metadata in oracle and it is reporting following
> error.
>
>
> IMG-01002: unsupported DICOM version
>
> Cause: The object header could not be parsed, possibly because the
> object header did not conform to the DICOM standard release 2003.
>
> Action: Use an object that conforms to the DICOM standard release 2003.
> Refer to the Oracle interMedia documentation for more information.
>
>
> We have stored the images in the oracle sucessfully and because we are
> unable to get metadata and the error specifies the diffrence between
> release no. which we are using and oracle supports ,I am trying to find
> the difference/relationship between "Version No." and "Release No."
>
> We only know that our images are of version 3.0 of Dicom AND don't know
> any release No. Are there any releases after release 2003 or before it
> ,having the version no. 3 or any other versions?
> If any body in the form can guide about version no's and releases I
> shall be very thankful to him.
> Pls. mail me at Pranabh.jain@mh.org.au
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Pranabh
>

Hi David,
Thanks for your support and the long explanation.It has
certainly helped us a lot about DICOM versions and releases.

Regards
Pranabh

David Clunie wrote:
> Hi Pranabh
>
> There is only one version of DICOM, that is 3.0; the version number
> never changes and is present only to distinguish DICOM from the old
> ACR-NEMA 1.0 and 2.0 standards.
>
> What constitutes the current standard is the most recently published
> version (currently 2006) + any corrections and supplements that have
> passed ballot and have been approved as final text.
>
> There is no identifier for any particular such release of the standard;
> i.e., there is only one and that is what is most current.
>
> It is specifically intended that people not claim support for any
> particular published version (2003, 2006, etc.), since whatever is
> current makes that obsolete. Rather they should explicitly list what
> they do support in their conformance statement, since no implementation
> is likely to contain everything in the standard, in terms of composite
> object storage, transfer syntaxes, services, etc., and applications that
> support the same SOP classes are expected to be inter-operable
> regardless of when the SOP class was added to DICOM.
>
> So, it is inappropriate for Oracle implementation to mention DICOM
> standard release 2003 - rather it should refer you to its conformance
> statement where it should list the SOP Classes supported.
>
> In your specific instance, what type of image object is Oracle having
> trouble with ? It could be bad and perhaps trigger this message for
> other reasons than not being a SOP Class that Oracle supports.
>
> Try running it through dciodvfy or similar, which will tell you what the
> SOP Class is and whether there is anything obvious wrong with the image.
>
> David
>
> pranabh.jain@mh.org.au wrote:
> > Hi,
> > There seems to be difference in "release" and "version". Is
> > there any way you could look up the "release" of your version of
> > DICOM?
> >
> > I am trying to get metadata in oracle and it is reporting following
> > error.
> >
> >
> > IMG-01002: unsupported DICOM version
> >
> > Cause: The object header could not be parsed, possibly because the
> > object header did not conform to the DICOM standard release 2003.
> >
> > Action: Use an object that conforms to the DICOM standard release 2003.
> > Refer to the Oracle interMedia documentation for more information.
> >
> >
> > We have stored the images in the oracle sucessfully and because we are
> > unable to get metadata and the error specifies the diffrence between
> > release no. which we are using and oracle supports ,I am trying to find
> > the difference/relationship between "Version No." and "Release No."
> >
> > We only know that our images are of version 3.0 of Dicom AND don't know
> > any release No. Are there any releases after release 2003 or before it
> > ,having the version no. 3 or any other versions?
> > If any body in the form can guide about version no's and releases I
> > shall be very thankful to him.
> > Pls. mail me at Pranabh.jain@mh.org.au
> >
> > Thanks and Regards
> > Pranabh
> >

Thank you David for the comment.
Pranabh:
I work for Oracle.
Oracle's DICOM support is a database server side SDK, so we do not have
a
conformance statement. We expect third party software developers
who build applications define such conformance statement.
What we meant by that message was that we supported the DICOM
object defined in the published standard as of year 2003.
We will clarify the error messages in the next release.

The newer Oracle release is in sync with the lastest published version
of the DICOM standard.

thank you.

pranabh.jain@mh.org.au wrote:
> Hi David,
> Thanks for your support and the long explanation.It has
> certainly helped us a lot about DICOM versions and releases.
>
> Regards
> Pranabh
>
> David Clunie wrote:
> > Hi Pranabh
> >
> > There is only one version of DICOM, that is 3.0; the version number
> > never changes and is present only to distinguish DICOM from the old
> > ACR-NEMA 1.0 and 2.0 standards.
> >
> > What constitutes the current standard is the most recently published
> > version (currently 2006) + any corrections and supplements that have
> > passed ballot and have been approved as final text.
> >
> > There is no identifier for any particular such release of the standard;
> > i.e., there is only one and that is what is most current.
> >
> > It is specifically intended that people not claim support for any
> > particular published version (2003, 2006, etc.), since whatever is
> > current makes that obsolete. Rather they should explicitly list what
> > they do support in their conformance statement, since no implementation
> > is likely to contain everything in the standard, in terms of composite
> > object storage, transfer syntaxes, services, etc., and applications that
> > support the same SOP classes are expected to be inter-operable
> > regardless of when the SOP class was added to DICOM.
> >
> > So, it is inappropriate for Oracle implementation to mention DICOM
> > standard release 2003 - rather it should refer you to its conformance
> > statement where it should list the SOP Classes supported.
> >
> > In your specific instance, what type of image object is Oracle having
> > trouble with ? It could be bad and perhaps trigger this message for
> > other reasons than not being a SOP Class that Oracle supports.
> >
> > Try running it through dciodvfy or similar, which will tell you what the
> > SOP Class is and whether there is anything obvious wrong with the image.
> >
> > David
> >
> > pranabh.jain@mh.org.au wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > There seems to be difference in "release" and "version". Is
> > > there any way you could look up the "release" of your version of
> > > DICOM?
> > >
> > > I am trying to get metadata in oracle and it is reporting following
> > > error.
> > >
> > >
> > > IMG-01002: unsupported DICOM version
> > >
> > > Cause: The object header could not be parsed, possibly because the
> > > object header did not conform to the DICOM standard release 2003.
> > >
> > > Action: Use an object that conforms to the DICOM standard release 2003.
> > > Refer to the Oracle interMedia documentation for more information.
> > >
> > >
> > > We have stored the images in the oracle sucessfully and because we are
> > > unable to get metadata and the error specifies the diffrence between
> > > release no. which we are using and oracle supports ,I am trying to find
> > > the difference/relationship between "Version No." and "Release No."
> > >
> > > We only know that our images are of version 3.0 of Dicom AND don't know
> > > any release No. Are there any releases after release 2003 or before it
> > > ,having the version no. 3 or any other versions?
> > > If any body in the form can guide about version no's and releases I
> > > shall be very thankful to him.
> > > Pls. mail me at Pranabh.jain@mh.org.au
> > >
> > > Thanks and Regards
> > > Pranabh
> > >